Re: The next patch
 

Hey Peter, don't blame me for using your numbers! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
Obviously ignoring extra gem income is a simplification, but it's good enough to evaluate returns in regards to investment anyway.

Graeme:

Quote:

Who says you won't cast search spells? You must remember that water magic is essentially useless other than for quickness, so it's not a particularly big loss to convert all your water gems to astral ones.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Oportunity costs. Mages & gems used to do one cannot be used to do the other. So you gotta choose.

Quote:

It does only take about 35 turns to get to 100 clams once you have a decent income in other gems, as that's exactly what I've done with R'Lyeh.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Could you elaborate on this? % magic sites? map? # opponents? who are you putting 100 clams on?
And most important of all: where Atlantis & Ermor in the game?

What kind of game are you playing that you can spend 750-1000 gems in items with no immediate return, without your military power resenting from it? Really, if you had such a surplus why didn't you just go for the game & start killing opponents?

Re clams vs Voice of Tiamat:

Quote:

No reason you can't do both. But once you've searched all your water provinces, there's no reason not to make clams.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Opportunity costs of course. Even more important because when you delay clam forging you delay your Return On Investment from those clams.

I am not saying that clam-forging cannot work, rather that it applies to very specific game settings. It's obvious that strategies based on economy building are stronger the longer the game, tho I find some of the 'fixes' being suggested a bit radical.

Why don't you just play faster games? The same fun with less MM. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Not really. Any water gem income cuts the time to 100 (TO100) by a good 10 turns or so.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">But you can do both. With construction 6 it only takes a water 1 mage to build a clam, and those mages aren't that hard to come by. What else would you do with a water 2 mage?

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">50% magic sites, independents 6, Orania, 17 players. The clams go on star children who are researching.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I didn't have that kind of surplus. I had an income of about 5 water gems per turn and 10 astral per turn. From turn 20 when I started, I had my 100 clams by turn 55. Whenever I needed gems quickly I just skipped one turn of clam production and had an easy 20 to 50 pearls to work with for that turn. I'm not sinking 750-1000 gems into the clams. I'm sinking about 150 water gems (useless for anything else), and about 300 astral pearls from site income. The rest of the gems are produced by the clams themselves. There's really nothing else that's worthwhile for a nation like R'lyeh to do with its water gems.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You don't actually delay the ROI much at all, since any site based income makes the TO100 come 10's of turns faster.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Building clams is an geometric growth with time. This is something that very few other strategies can produce.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I wasn't aware that a game that's in turn ~60 was a long game.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If you can do both then you are swimming in gems & have a comfortable lead.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">450 gems, 300 of them being astrals is still a substantial amount. Just checked your numbers & they only seem to match if those gems are used from the very start (ie, you start with 30 clams in turn 21-22), so you are likely to have spent much more than your estimation.

Your experience seems to differ also from mine. By turn 20 I am often already at war or planning to, and form then on do not stop fighting until the end of the game.

From an outsider PoV Atlantis seems to have been particularly passive in your game, same with Ermor. By turn 20+ a number of land nations should also have developed the means to at least be able to raid seas, if not hold on them.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Debatable. Early on Voice of Tiamat gives better returns that clams. Later on Murdering winter, Wolven winter + a number of good summons are also an option. And that without considering battlefield usage.

I am also far from convinced that spending 15-20 astrals to start getting the returns 10 turns later is a good move.

Quote:

I wasn't aware that a game that's in turn ~60 was a long game.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">We obviously have different tastes on this.

edit- typo

[ April 02, 2004, 20:39: Message edited by: Wendigo ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">is not present in the game.

Even so, it's disputable that a clam strategy would be a better investment than an early casting of Voice of Tiamat on every sea: Sacrifice 10 gems for a 1 gem income, or 8 gems for a 2+ income?

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You are missing the point Wendigo - Voice of Tiamat has hard max limit - the total number of your provinces. Clams don't. As Graeme said it's geometrical progression.

[ April 02, 2004, 19:34: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: The next patch
 

Originally posted by Stormbinder:

Quote:

You are missing the point Wendigo - Voice of Tiamat has hard max limit - the total number of your provinces. Clams don't. As Graeme said it's geometrical progression.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I am missing nothing.

It was argued that there was no better use for early water gems, so I just offered a better use.

As the game advances, it's less and less of an advantage to invest those waters in clams (as you will get less return, and there will be new options available).

You guys seem to defend that dumping huge amounts in clams is both necessary & compulsory to be able to compete. I have certainly won more than once without doing that, so I dispute this line of reasoning.

What I am saying is that this 'geometric growth' strategy only works in some very specific settings: big map, long game, water income, passive players, relative early invulnerability.

Nothing I have seen posted so far contradicts the above, and Graeme's example seems to rather confirm it. Additionally, forging clams is definitely not the only way to get 'free' gems/money/troops.

You might argue that it's a very cost effective one, and I would agree that it could indeed be some times, but I will tell you also that you maybe should consider putting some more care in the choice of settings for your next game, and be more agressive vs those hoarders.

[ April 02, 2004, 19:54: Message edited by: Wendigo ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I am missing nothing.

It was argued that there was no better use for early water gems, so I just offered a better use.

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Nobody said you shouldn't look for water sites or use both Voices if you have sea provinces. Quite opposite - it was said here many times that you should do it, and than dump all your increased water income in clams, if you are using clam hoarding strategy. This way you'll be able to make even more clams and have larger gem income at the end of the same period, as long as this period is longer than 15-20 turns, depending on your particular settings.

And because you only have limited number of provinces and search spells for water are cheap, you can serach every province (except farm lands perhaps)with minimum water gem investment. After these provinces are searched you will concentrate on clams using your water and/or astral income, while using all other gem types for defense/attack/whatever.

If you have any water/astral income and water mages (and you obviosly do since you need them to produce clams) you can do it quite quickly.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Have you ever played medium or long games against good opponent who is using clam-hoarding strategy? Based upon your Posts I seriosly doubt it. Go and play it, and than come back and tell us about your victory. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

You have said yourslef earlier that you are playing short games and even went so far as to recommended all of us to do the same. Thanks, but some of us like different game types than you. Why do you feel that everybody should play the type of game that you are playing? Because in this particular game type the clam hoarding strategy is less valid? Or because you happened to dislike what you think of as "MM"? That's strange arguments in my opinion... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It's not about free gems or money or troops. It's about it in rapid geomethrical progression. The "avalanche" effect if you are familar with it. If you think you can point any other "geometrical progression" strategy avalaible in this game that is as efficient as clam hoarding please do it - I would be interested to know. I doubt that you can however.

[ April 02, 2004, 20:42: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: The next patch
 

Quote:

Originally posted by Stormbinder: Nobody said you shouldn't look for water sites or use both Voices if you have sea provinces. Quite opposite - it was said here many times that you should do it,

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">False. Nobody had mentioned Voice of Tiamat before I did so.

Quote:

and than dump all your increased water income in clams, if you are using clam hoarding strategy. This way you'll be able to make even more clams and have larger gem income at the end of the same period, as long as this period is longer than 15-20 turns, depending on your particular settings.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Bul****. Graeme did not start making them until turn20. He did not start getting his investment back until well into turn40+.

Quote:

Have you ever played medium or long games against good opponent who is using clam-hoarding strategy? Based upon your Posts I seriosly doubt it. Go and play it, and than come back and tell us about your victory. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I have been playing Dom & Dom II for over 3 years, all type of maps & games. Experience & tastes are 2 different things.

If you are interested in serious debate or a game, I am available, otherwise keep your winks for yourself.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">A bit more, but there are very few uses for astral gems in the mid game, and your site searching can be performed more effectively by a group of multiple mages casting specifically targeted spells.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I managed to create non-agression pacts and alliances with all my neighbours, and any exploratory attacks were met by a force of many Illithid's and fodder. Gateway and a good fortress/lab network allows R'Lyeh to move many troops very quickly.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Atlantis and I were allied from turn one, and Ermor was busy dealing with Atlantis and the other nations surrounding it.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Sure you can use murdering winter, but it requires one of your national heroes, or a very rare 3 water starspawn and construction 6 to cast it. By the time you have developed the ability to cast it regularly you could have built enough clams to support casting it once per turn.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I actual consider the returns to come immediately, since it allows you to produce more astral items and such in any given turn, rather than worrying about keeping a stockpile of gems that can't be replenished quickly.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Sure, but to say that one should avoid playing games that go beyond 40 turns to keep them balanced is hardly a good thing.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It was said that you should look for water gems to add to your intital water/astral income by both Graeme and Peter. Voice of Tiamat is just one posible option. Read Posts below.


<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I am not in Graeme's game, so I can't comment for him. But I think the fact that he is winning his game while in war with all other 4 opponnents, according to Zap, speaks for itself. If you have any further questions or comments about Greame's game I suggest talk to him, not to me.


<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Good for you. Than you should be able to reilize that different people have differnt tastes when it comes to playing Dom2, and the fact that your tastes lies in some particualar settings doesn't mean that everybody should play it, or that any unbalances that manifest themself outside of these settings does not matter.


<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I am. I asked you specific question that you haven't answered - you were refering to some other strategies that were as effective/abusive as clam hoarding. Can you name any?

[ April 02, 2004, 21:21: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Site searching was mentioned considerably before you mentioned it in this thread.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I could, however, have stopped making them at any point if necessary, and immediately had more total gem income than what I would have had if I had used only provincial site searching and used my gems for various things.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You are not going to get a game with nations perfectly balanced for both the long & short term. Some nations are better short term & some long term, same with designs.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Check this one for example for another 'economic strategy':
http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin...=001570#000004

Others with a similar focus: Anything blood-slave related or concerning hoarding the Elemental kings/queens that produce free (and good!) troops-> It does not feed on itself as gem generators+ alchemy, but the troops provide gems+coin by giving you the provinces of your enemies.

In the end, you should not forget that the game is won & lost by winning & losing battles. The economy is not everything.

[ April 02, 2004, 21:40: Message edited by: Wendigo ]

Re: The next patch
 

I have nulled the advantage of Clams in Zenmod 82.3.

It takes out Wish. Now you must use normal ways to use your Astral Income either converting or using the pure Astrals.

Now if I could find a way to mod away the whining of people who build 'forts' then it would be 'balanced'.

Re: The next patch
 

I am not going to answer everything because it would take us nowhere, many of the arguments we are using are being circular & repetitive.

I will stick to my main point (yet uncontested):

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">This basically confirms my earlier Posts, you were an unchallenged water power..as previously noted:

"this 'geometric growth' strategy only works in some very specific settings: big map, long game, water income, passive players, relative early invulnerability."

Really, the unballance in this game seems to be the R'lyeh-Atlantis alliance, rather than the clams.

[ April 02, 2004, 21:51: Message edited by: Wendigo ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Wendigo is one of the best players I know of, with a good grasp of the early game and a punishing grasp of the end game. I deeply regretted having invested water gems in pearls when losing to him. I lost many to murdering winter, and regretted not having spent them on something as simple as frost resist rings, or summons.

Frankly, you guys have _still_ done nothing to counter his points, and merely repeat your astute observation that Clams can pay off in the very long term, or resort to circular logic.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Hmm, interesting. Sounds like a good mod for MP. Care to post link to it? Also are there any other changes there in addition to the to that you have mentioned?

BTW if it's funny that you were arguing with me on the previous page of this thread, saying that clams are just fine the way they are now. Did you changed your opinion or just created the mod to satisfy the other side of the argument? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Whatever the case I appreciate your mod, thank you. To use it in MP should it be installed on every player's comp or only on the host?

Re: The next patch
 

I'm still of the opinion that Clams are of a very slight imbalance (only situational in one type of game or one type of player).

The reason I made the Mod is because I got tired of the lure of Wishing. It was for a very specific game (with Easy Magical Research) and we didn't want it to turn into a wishfest as that is very, very boring.

I don't have the file on me, but I'll be happy to Email it to anyone who wants it to try for some different starting settings of games.

Edit: I think that the reason Jasper and Pepe and a few others feel the way they do is they are of a similiar temperment (as I am) of aggression, I don't believe ethnic and religious cleansing should have alot of peace and at the very least vicious backstabbing to find the one true God. With that kind of temperment, having someone be able to sit by and make Clams unmolested until the game is more boring than fun is hard to imagine happening enough to be imbalanced.

[ April 02, 2004, 22:43: Message edited by: Zen ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well, it's not like there's anything that R'Lyeh can spend water or astral gems on in great numbers that will help them in underwater battles against Atlantis. R'lyeh has virtually no capacity for casting ritual spells, and the number of underwater spells that cost either kind of gem is very low.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It may be true, but it doesn't mean that there should be no attemts to improve the overall balance of the game, even considering the fact that the ideal balance can not be archived because it doesn't exist. In particular case with clams, you seem to admit that they are very unbalancing in long games. If this is so, and if they are as uneffective as you claim they are in short games, than why not make them harder to forge as suggested earlier?

Short games that you like to play will not be affected in any signifcant degree according to you, and medium and long game where clam hoarding can be a big issue will definetly be improved. I see it as clear win-win situation.


<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Check this one for example for another 'economic strategy':
http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin...=001570#000004

Others with a similar focus: Anything blood-slave related or concerning hoarding the Elemental kings/queens that produce free (and good!) troops-> It does not feed on itself as gem generators+ alchemy, but the troops provide gems+coin by giving you the provinces of your enemies.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I think you've answered your own question. These strategies that you describe with blood and King/Queens summons are just what you said - some free troops. But because none of these tactics, as you put it, are "feeding on itself" it's very different in its nature from clam hoarding as I think you reilize yourself.

In mathematical terms Clam hoarding is geometric progression. What you descibing are ariphemetic progressions. As you probably know they are very different.


The argument that using thess strategies will give you more provinces is not really relivent. So would any other good strategy, that allow you to conquer enemy territory and by doing this would allow you to become more powerfull. These are just efficient strategies, some of the many available ones. But because they don't have "snowball" effect ("feeding on itself" in your own terms), which is the main attribute of geometric progression, they are not abusive, but instead are just good valid strategies that can be countered with others equaly good ones - and that's what this game is about after all.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">True. But the economy matters a lot as well. And if one decent player have 10 times more economic resourses than the other, than he will very likely win even aginst expert opponent, not by superior tactic in battles but because of his economic might that will alow him to have 10 times more soldiers, summons, etc.

[ April 02, 2004, 22:57: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Perhaps you could send it to Gandalf and he would be kind enough to host it on his brand new "Dom2minions" website? It's would be nice to have some link from where those who don't have it could download it before the start of the game. (if it has to be installed on every player's computer - is it?)


EDIT: NM, I misread your post (geting tired). I though you took out Wish _and_ Clams. My fault.

Guess I'll have to wait until Clams are fixed (hopefully) in the patch. Or if not than perhaps somebody would make a mod for it. Or maybe I should do it myslef - how difficult it can possibly be?!? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ April 03, 2004, 00:04: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well, the scariness all depends on the other players letting the astral user getting away with it. It takes 20+1 rounds for astrals gems converted to water gems made into clams of pearls to pay off (14+1 rounds with a dwarven hammer, but then you need to pay for the hammer as well) so it takes a medium to long term game with a heavy investment in astral for a long, long, time to become truly scary.

I guess it is easier to get away with the more players there are, as it becomes possible to be overlooked for some time by not acting particularly aggressively and by being hard to attack. R'lyeh would probably be the best candidate for that with an "We're just a bunch of squid-faces on the bottom of the sea who want to live in peace" - while hoarding astral clams.

But even so, for my money, it is not all that abusable as it requires active collusion from your enemies for many dozens of turns in order to reach critical mass (unless you fight a large number of very good sites nearly). If your enemies hit you hard, it is going to be hard to avoid diverting a fair number of gems into various magical defenses and summonings.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Not letting someone "get away" with something implies that there's some way of discovering that they're doing it. If the culprit sits on their astral stash until the mid to late game, who's to know ?

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Not letting someone "get away" with something implies that there's some way of discovering that they're doing it. If the culprit sits on their astral stash until the mid to late game, who's to know ? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">No, it implies that there is a way of preventing the astral user from doing it, whether someone else knows about it or not. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

What I mean is that if everybody is leaving a player mostly alone for 40-60 turns or attacking him so little that he is not forced to use gems in his defense, they damn well deserve what happens to them after that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: The next patch
 

Yeah, it sounds OK in theory. But in practice, you're just one fish in a very big pond. You can't hassle everybody, and you have to look after your own interests at home. In the game I referred to earlier in this thread, going after R'lyeh any earlier would have been the end of me. You just don't have that kind of control over the game.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Any effective investment of resources will have what you term a snowball effect. If you poor gems into summons these summons will allow you to conquer more provinces which will lead you to gain more available searchable provinces as well as income and resources, which in turn will allow you to earn more and summon more to conquer more which will let you ... etc.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Just curious, this statement lost me. What's wrong with 'forts', and why are people whining about it?

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I am with Jasper. I am far from impressed by the above numbers, and those are a 'best possible' scenario for an astral power: Construction research for clam forging + 1 dwarven hammer already forged available both from turn3, which is basically impossible.

Even if it was, forfeiting the gem income from 20 turns (100 gems!) to get a +10 gem income is far from impressive. On standard settings I am pretty sure I could get a better income with half the investment by just casting a few search spells.

It seems to me that the players running into this are playing extremely big maps vs fairly passive opponents. The only nations I can imagine pulling this on more average settings are Atlantis & R'lyeh (thanks to the combination of early invulnerability & water income), and only if the other sea nation is not present in the game.

Even so, it's disputable that a clam strategy would be a better investment than an early casting of Voice of Tiamat on every sea: Sacrifice 10 gems for a 1 gem income, or 8 gems for a 2+ income?

As far as I am concerned, clam forging is a good use for water gems that have no immediate use, but I cannot imagine alchemying astrals for this.

[ April 02, 2004, 12:53: Message edited by: Wendigo ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Any effective investment of resources will have what you term a snowball effect. If you poor gems into summons these summons will allow you to conquer more provinces which will lead you to gain more available searchable provinces as well as income and resources, which in turn will allow you to earn more and summon more to conquer more which will let you ... etc. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Thank you for reply Johan, I really appreciate it.


Certanly, I agree with your statement. After all
in any strategic game that I can think about once you begin to win territory/resourses from your opponent(s) and get stronger each new conquest is theoretically easer for you because now you have all your old resourses plus resourses of newly conquered
territory/country/province/colony/whatever. And it doesn't matter that much what tactic you are using while doing this because the result still the same.


But what I strongly feel makes clam-hoarding special case is the speed with witch it is happening. Once you have it really going you can double your gem investments very quickly (every 5-8 turns, depending on avaliablity of hammers/forge sites/mages). Look at Peter's two tables below for example, which describe the evolution of just _5_ astral gems invested into clams in the begining of the game. And of course in real game you often invest other water/astral gems into clams once you get additional income from searching your provinces, so it is even faster.


So the speed with wich the "snowball" grows once it gets rolling is much faster(mainly because it is geometrical progression) than with regular linear progression when you conquer enemy provinces. Also when you conquer province in your example you often suffer losses - and that slows your expansion. When you are siting in your castles mass-forging clams there are no losses, other than a bit of lost reseach, since it's just pure mathematic and doubling your investment every N turns.


But there is another factor that you and Kristofer are the only people quilified to comment about. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Please tell me this - when you designed this fantastic game, with all these different unique magic sites, as well as high-level spells for all magic schools - was it you intention that the Magic (gems) that power these spells would come mostly from these uniques sites of yours, from the territory that your Pretender God controls, perhaps with small addition of item-generated gems? Or your vision for the end-game was that by the end of medium and long games anywhere from 90-99% of your magic gems would be coming from hundreds and hundreds of clams siting in your magical treaury? Because as of now, as even opponents of clam-changes agree on this thread, more often than not it is 2nd situation by the end of many of long MP games.

I am sorry, I just can't help but feel that this is not the way it was intended to be by you, designers, since massive clam hoarding that person currently has to do to stay competitive against other clam-hoarders in long games feels so... boring. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif


Now if you tell me that everything is working the way it was intended in regards of Clams than I'll just shut up and will not bring this topic again on this Boards, I swear! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ April 03, 2004, 01:52: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Not exactly... I don't think it's a style of play issue. I'm not particularily attached to either style of play, but just think that aggresive play in Dominions clearly dominates passive play.

I have yet to see a passive player do anything other than be annexed.

[ April 03, 2004, 11:17: Message edited by: Jasper ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">This is exactly it. IMHO there are simply better forms of investment than Clams, e.g. seizing reseource generation from other players, especially as compared to having your resources stolen. Growth from conquest is exponential as well -- and far swifter than Clams.

IMHO the clam hoarder will have his resources stolen long before he can abuse geometric growth.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">No, growth from conquest is _not_ exponential, and neither is growth from clams. Growth from conquest is linear. Growth from clams is geometric. You capture a province, search it for magic sites, and once you've done that you've received all the benefits you are ever going to receive from that province. Your gem income from there does not double every few turns, and your gold income does not either. The clams on the other hand, double in the amount of gems they produce without requiring any expansion whatsoever.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Why don't you explain just how, exactly, making clams from astral and water gems hurts your ability to defend yourself? Please don't mention spells such as murdering winter, since it is useless even when combined with wolven winter in a heat dominion, and even more useless once the clam hoarder has put multiple domes over their capital.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Who is saying anthing about passive play? Water gems are not particularly useful for expansion, or attacking your enemy until the late game. You can always save those pearls that you get from sites to use for your defense, and only use those generated by clams to fuel more clams, and experience no effective reduction in magical power over the person who is not making clams. It adds a few turns to the time to 100 clams, but who says that you blindly go for 100 clams, and ignore your other needs? Even an astral income of 50 per turn from items is ridiculously large.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Greame: The income from one captured province will indeed linearly increase your money. The thing is that the gold you recieve from this province will in turn allow you to field bigger armies that will allow you to increase your speed of expansion, which will allow you to recruit even bigger armies etc. Thus making expansion by conquest a geometric growth as well. This is then somewhat hampered by upkeep and the need to replace losses in combat etc. But on the other hand the increased return on the investment from conquering a province is often faster than the 7-20 turn investment return from clam forging. A good province might well recompensate the losses of capturing it within the next turn or two.

I am not ruling out that clams are overpowered, just disputing that the dividends paid by clam hoarding is unique in having geometric growth compared to other forms of resource collection.

Stormbinder, just to clear things up, while I am responsible for some of what have went into dom 2, it is Johan Karlssson and Kristoffer (my brother) who are the principal creators and designers of dom 2.

Edit: Capturing provinces also potentionally denies them to other players. Possibly hemming their growth. Every clam, like every province, provides a linear increase in a resource, or potentionally several resources for a province, but since both clams and provinces can be used to acquire more of the same (provinces by allowing you to field more armies) they both alow for geometric growth, both snowballs both feed upon themselves. Clams however does not hit the roof in the way provinces does when territores come into short supply.

[ April 03, 2004, 20:03: Message edited by: johan osterman ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'm not suggesting that they be removed entirely, or even have a hard cap placed on them. I'm just suggesting that perhaps something like horror marking the user (Say that the horrors are attracted to this source of magic), would be an effective limiter. With 5 people holding clams, you won't see too many horror attacks, and your losses will be small. With 50 holding clams, you will most likely see enough attacks by horrors to limit the growth potential.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'm not suggesting that they be removed entirely, or even have a hard cap placed on them. I'm just suggesting that perhaps something like horror marking the user (Say that the horrors are attracted to this source of magic), would be an effective limiter. With 5 people holding clams, you won't see too many horror attacks, and your losses will be small. With 50 holding clams, you will most likely see enough attacks by horrors to limit the growth potential. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I am not 100% sure if horror-marking clam hoarders would be enough to limit clam-abuse. It'll all depends on average life expectancy of standart clam's owner, and I don't have numbers to make a qualified guess.

Personally I think it would be better to make Clams cost 20 water gems and require con 6, and make Fever Fetishes cost 10 fire gems and 5 death (same con6). But if for some reason High Powers (developers) disagree with such changes, than at least making clam owners horror-marked would definetly be a step in right direction.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Disease is a fire/nature effect (seven year fever), so that change doesn't make that much sense.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana"><nod> Got it, thank you for clarification Johan.

I hope that KrissofferO or Johan Karlsson will check this thread again sooner or later and will post their opinion about this Clam-hoarding issue. I know that they both are very acive on this forum and extremely helpfull (more than any other game developer that I ever meet in fact, and this is not ***-kissing statement http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif ), as well as you Jason, so it'll probably happens sooner or later.


Also as I've said earlier I really would like to know if their design vision for the end of medium and long MP games included having 90-99% gem income coming from hundreds of Clams instead of magic sites. If it was by design, than IMHO we all should just drop this topic. If not (as I realy hope it is), than we may hope that they will fix it one way or another.


EDIT: Graeme - you are right of course, I meant to say 10 fire 5 nature. Also current ability for undead to hold fetishes without any bad side effects while producing firegems doesn't seem right to me, but this was mentioned by other people before.

[ April 04, 2004, 03:39: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If there's ever agreement that there's a problem that needs fixing here, then I think that this particular fix would be overkill.

For a start, the problem is really clams leading to massive astral production leading to Wishes ending the game. So Fever Fetishes probably don't need fixing at all.

And if clams were 5 water 5 nature, that would probably fix them as well, since water/nature mages are harder to come by than water-2 mages, and nature gems have other uses that would tempt the potential clam-hoarder.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I think chain-casting Wishes is just one of the possible use of hoards of clams in the end-game. Granted, it may very well be the most effective current use of huge astral income from clams (that's why Zen killed Wishes in his mod as I understand it), but I don't think elimination or changes to Wishes would solve the real problem of clams abuse. It may lessen the effects of its most-obvious sympthom, but the problem would still be there, since wishes are not the only thing you can do with your huge astral income from clams.

[ April 04, 2004, 09:52: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: The next patch
 

Exponential clam growth strikes me as somewhat unlikely, because that requires a corresponding exponential growth in the number of water mages, and that's difficult to do unless you have an absolutely incredible amount of water gems coming in for Sea King's Court and can also deal with the exponentially growing maintenance cost. Not to mention that every mage forging clams is a mage that could be doing research or leading troops or so forth.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If all you want is 100 clams, then you'll never need more than between 5-10 water 1 mages to make them once you can build water bracelets.

Re: The next patch
 

Ok here's a suggestion:

Make Clams require Water-2, Astral-1, 10 Water and 5 Astral to forge.

This would slow the expansion, and require the forgers to have Astral magic as well, which is appropriate (since they create astral gems), and also harder to get the required forgers.

PvK

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That would work too.

Re: The next patch
 

I prefer my suggestion (nature-1 water-1) because it requires nature gems (not produced by the clams) and R'lyeh has water/astral mages straight out of the box.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I agree that Nature-1/Water-1 mages are much harder to come by than Water-2/Astral-1 mages. (In addition to Ry'lyeh, Atlantis also has Water-2/Astral-1 mages right out of the box).

- Matt Lepinski :->

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I agree that Nature-1/Water-1 mages are much harder to come by than Water-2/Astral-1 mages. (In addition to Ry'lyeh, Atlantis also has Water-2/Astral-1 mages right out of the box).

- Matt Lepinski :-> </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Water/Nature perhaps makes more sense from thematic point of view. But if clams would be made along this elements than I think 10 water 5 nature would be much better, especially if clams will be left at con4.

As for hard to come by at mages capable of making them - I disagree. Any amazon priestess could make them since they have nature 1 water 1 magic pathes. They are extremely cheap at 100 gp, in addition to being sacred troops that halve their maintaence. Any present lvl 2 water mages would cost much more than that, so it would be a step backward in this regard of mainanence cost.

Amazon provinces are quite common forest type province. Besides nature 5 water 5 is too low anyway, IMHO clams should cost at least 15 gems total to slow its return of investment.

10 nature gems and 5 water would work better than 10 water 5 nature btw - this wat at least if the player is going to use cheap mages with patch enchansers to mass-produce clams he would have to pay 10 nature for wristle mace to raise nature level from 1 to 2, intead of paying just 5 for water braclet. (as in case with water 10 nature 5)

Also as it was mentioned nature gems are more valuble in general than water, tempting the player to spend it elsewhere.

[ April 05, 2004, 02:57: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Clams and fetishes are both Con2, and there's little to be gained by raising either to Con4, IMHO, even if we agree that clams are out of balance.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Maintenance on the clam forgers is not really an issue, amazons are not common (at least not as common as national troops) and our objective is to slow the rate of clam production which can be done without increasing their total cost, IMHO.

Changing clams from water-2 to nature-1,water-1 is a small enough change to have some chance of being accepted by the devs, and the folks that think there's no problem to be fixed.

Re: The next patch
 

[quote]Originally posted by Zapmeister:


<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana"> <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Granted, it's not the most important factor but it still should be taken into calculation to get the whole picture. Mages are expansive. If you use say, your 270 gp none sacred mage as lvl 2 water one, than maintance would cost you 18gp per turn for each clam-maker. These things tend to add up. While 100gp priestess would cost you 3.3gp per turn. That's quite a differnce, if you are thinking about many clam-makers working together.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Anything is not as common as your national troops since you can build them in any castle, so obviously you can't judje indep. province frequency by such criteria. However as far as idep province types concern amazons are pretty common in the forests. I usually end up with anywhere from 1 to 2, sometimes 3 amazon provinces in my games after initial expansion stage.


<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I don't think that nature 5 water 5 would be an adequite solution. The solution that could fix overpowered clams problem without raising its cost - like seting max limit on number of clams per player, would require some changes to the code, and therefore is more likely to rejected by developers than simple small increase in gem cost.

[ April 05, 2004, 04:33: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes you can. We're trying to determine the availability of clam forgers. Atlantis and R'lyeh have national units that can forge water-2 clams. No-one has national troops that can forge water-1, nature-1 clams without a lucky random pick. That's the point.
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">But I'm not suggesting that. I'm saying that making them water-1,nature-1 is enough because of the reduced availability of forgers and the usefulness of nature gems for other purposes.

I'm also saying that anything more than that is overkill, and will never be accepted by the folks that don't even agree that clams are out of balance in the first place.

Re: The next patch
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana"> <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">First you are forgeting Jotunheim. Second - all I was saying is that is that amazons are quite common forest province, with mages that can be 5 times cheaper than your national water 2 mages, and capable of making clams that fits your suggestion for their gemcost (5W/5N). That's all.


<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana"> <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I know that. And like I said I disagee with that, for the reasons explained below.

[ April 05, 2004, 05:07: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

Re: The next patch
 

Speaking of the next patch... can someone tell me whether it has lockable research sliders?

The current system makes it impossible to obtain certain distributions. Since reductions in one get added to the smallest, and additions get pulled from the largest.

Drives me CRAZY!


Rabe the Unbalanced