Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Oh before this I was upset that a 90 Gold Astral-1 mage could magic duel to death a 450 gold capital only Nagarashi.

But quite frankly this is much, much, worse.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

In this instance I do agree with bob, such a test would prove almost nothing.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Well I don't think I've ever heard someone claim that bandar log was a rush nation but sounds like a fun match.

I should be free tomorrow if you don't find an opponent by then(or even if you do). I almost never blitz and am not exactly a great player but I find it hard to turn down a game.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

No doubt that will make it even easier for MA Bandar Log to beat MA Man.

I would like to point out that my choices are not cheap in any way. I did not pick Patala, and I did not pick MA Van. I am also not going to use a bless, at all.

Those are very reasonable terms.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

LOL

This is the most absurd discussion I've seen on the forums in some time.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Whooo, seems like some strong opinions here. Not to beat a dead horse, but PD strength is a characteristic of a nation which you plan around. Some nations have crappy PD, I doubt anyone would argue that the monkeys are one of them, this is hardly a insurmountable disadvantage. Some nations have their only good troops cap only, some have old mages, some have dominions with potentially negative effect (disease, insanity, death), some have high resource requirements, some have cold blooded/undead/demonic/aquatic only/no archer/low magic versatility/low MR weaknesses...these are all things you plan around. Several people have offered ways to compensate for weak PD, there are also others if you're clever. Suffice it to say small raiding parties are hardly an unbeatable strategy to use against Bandar Log and I don't consider them weak at all.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Repeating the revelant comparison with other races "weak" PD:
PD serves one purpose, and one purpose alone. It stops you from having to chase mageless, indie, mini-armies all around your empire. That is the only purpose for which it exists. The giants and Man's PD is QUITE CAPABLE of defeating a 200 gold raiding force at 20.

This is what is going to happen to the "awesome" 17 Indie Archer/1 Indie Commander raiding force against the "lousy" Giant PD. The Giants 2 commanders and 10 Giant Militia are going to take arrow fire and then reach the archers. They are then going to swing. At which point many, many archers will die. The Indie Archers with a morale of 7(-1 Dominion Penalty) are then probably going to route. At that point the giants will run them down and kill every one of them. The Commander will probably get away.

The Giant PD really sucks.

Oh yeah, EA Caleum is going to be PAWNED! By them 17 Indie Archers. They got some fliers, and you see, them fliers going to "stupidly charge" them archers and route them before the archers fire one shot. Them EA Caleum PD is OWNED by them Archers. COMPLETE PAWNAGE!

There is bad, and then there is hidiously ridiclious.

I can't even believe people are talking about Man PD. I have used 65 Man PD, backed by research mages and some longbowman and castle guards to repel 2 waves of 400 man armies backed by multiple mages from EA Ermor in the multiplayer game where I took over a messed up MA Man on some turn. MA Man PD is hidiously more powerfull than Ape PD. It is just plain mighty after 20.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

This is why a new strategy could be introduced for DOM_4 which allowed PD to be upgraded. This would add another layer of depth.
Seems only feasible a nation should have the option to improve its province defence. Considering the pretender controls the nation and all aspects of war... the pretender should have the power to order/research/purchase/etc ways of improving province defence.

{{The PD Story}}

Machaka Pretender, "Give me a report on our research progress!"
Arch_Sorceror, "We've finished learning the last of the spells and the last two enemies should be dead within the week."
Machaka Pretender, "Excellent... have them all move to the front as quickly as possible."
...small pause...
Machaka Pretender, "Give me a report on our income status!"
Elder Bane_Spider, "Our income is safely in the thousands with a little extra stored for an unexpected Utterdark yet our front line indicates it's unlikely."
Machaka Pretender, "Excellent... start having half of all money set aside for creating a personal temple of gold later."
Elder Bane_Spider, "Yes, anything my master."
...small pause...
Machaka Pretender, "Improve the body armor of our province defence and change their weapons from spears to long swords."
SC_Hunter_Lord, "Sorry we can't do that... they are part of a union and no changes for negotiations will occur for another 200 years."
Machaka Pretender, "What the FUDGE? I can call demons and devils from hell, mindlessly send you or anyone in my nation to death, cast globals altering weather and health of the realm BUT I can't improve our province defence!!"
SC_Hunter_Lord, "Yes that is correct... it's that same union which forces us to flee battles at 5pm(50_turns_autoretreat)"
Machaka Pretender, "What about after I'm officially granted godhood?"
SC_Hunter_Lord, "It's my understanding as god of the realm you'll be allowed to talk with union representatives once a month. Just don't piss them off!! That's how the realms last god died."

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Is this still being talked about?

So they have horribly bad PD. Dont buy any. Surely you do not believe that PD is the only useful way to stop from having to chase mageless, indie, mini-armies.

Yeah you might have to micromanage a bit more each turn and yeah a raiding force who gets in can be annoying, but its not like 1 raiding force is really gonna turn a game around if your busy smushing all the opponents stand up armies.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

I was comparing with the Lankan example you'd given. Should have quoted, given the flood of posts here.

Anyway, all these examples are silly. You're talking cheap indy attacks, not flying or stealthy or anything. So you're talking attacks along a hostile border. You don't rely on PD to hold a hostile border. You get choke points, build forts, etc.

Sure if you get blindsided, that crappy PD leaves you vulnerable, but that's what happens when you're taken by surprise. If they get behind your lines, hunt them down and kill them, but strengthen your border too.

When I think of raiders, I think of stealth/fliers and remote attacks. They can easily get into the backfield where you'll have little but PD. Anything that has to cross the front lines shouldn't be able to do so with a handful of indy archers. Garrison the borders. There should be troops able to reinforce any border province within a move or two.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Please name the nation with a weaker PD.

That is my one and only request of you.

Name the nation with a weaker PD.


I am willing to run a simulation of that nations PD against 17 Armoured Indie Archers and a Commander at 15 PD. I will then run Ape PD against 17 Indie Armoured Archers and a Commander at 25 PD. Guess which one will win? Guess which one might win if it is very, very lucky?

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

I'm not on anyones side, but I'd like to see it compared against Machaka's PD of 15.

I do believe an upgrade option should exist for province defence(with upkeep based on distance from capital) which would add another layer of depth to the game.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Fine, the monkeys have the weakest PD. I never disputed that.
(Don't know for sure, but I'll stipulate it for the sake of argument. It's bad, at least.)

That doesn't mean they're the weakest nations.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

I propose that Lord Bob use MA ulm against the monkey equivalent. Ulm has some pretty nice pd, it shouldn't be a problem.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

I just want to give Lord Bob a hug because he's having a bad day.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Yes, the Machaka Militia also have no armour and no shield on their base unit. So they to should completely fail the 17 Archer Challenge. They need to be upgraded as well.

Importantly, everyone else also agrees that Machaka is a "troubled" nation. Further proof of my statements.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Bob. As others have pointed out the thread in the MP forum doesn't provide the sort of evidence you are ascribing to it. There aren't enough games counted in it to even award 1 victory to each specific nation. So even if all nations had been played by equally skilled players and were exactly balanced there would still be a pretty good chance that any specific nation would have ended up without any wins.

Not that Patala et all might not have very weak PD, or even be weak nations. But in no way do you have support for the claim that they can never win in MP games.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Early expansion is one of the most important things in MP.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Ulm is considered one of the weakest (if not THE weakest) nation in the middle age (Ulm is going to have a hard time against bandar log in my opinion). Yet it has a very decent pd. Can you understand that pd is not the full picture and that you really need to look at the whole nation ?

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Sure. I'll take MA Ulm versus Bandar Log One VS. One.

Let's do that.

Do I have to win in 20 turns? Are we putting some sort of time limit on it to make it sporting?

Do you even know what you just said?

We'll be in mortal combat a long time before the powerfull combat magic gets out. And my arrow immune soldiers will run over Bandar easily.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

For improving the depth of gameplay an upgrade feature for province defence should be added to the DOM_4 list.
Explanation with story:
http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/thr...mp;#Post562268

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

I know what I said. You think I would fight fair in such a setup ? You would obviously have to deal with huge amounts of elephants early on, not archers.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

lol NT Jedi wants improved province defense as an option. Or at least thats what Ive gathered from every single post hes made in this topic so far. It'd be an interesting option depending exactly how it was implemented.

Lord Bob:

As Ulm, you will roll right over any enemy province only protected by PD. But ESPECIALLY in a one on one situation,
you are going to have trouble getting past any chokepoints the enemy has. Depending on the map, this will either be easier or harder to do.

But you still might lose the game, because your not the only one who will be attacking.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

When it's implemented will hopefully be DOM_4. How it's implemented can be by several factors... these are just examples of theories so no one should flip out. Construction research could provide better body armor, an extra scale during pretender design which specifically targets the units of PD, an academy building can provide increased morale and attack skill (destroyed same as lab if province lost), gem investment can provide strength bonus, health bonus and magic resistance bonus(elixirs), gold investment can provide improved shields and helms. I'm sure the developers can add other ideas to the list.
Some type of upkeep based on capital distance should also exist to prevent a powerful player from becoming more powerful.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Hopefully this isn't considered offensive, except how it is meant to be...

http://www.roflcat.com/images/cats/2...db35fdd4ca.jpg

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Bandar logs expansion is fast enough, you can start every second turn a force of approx 15 dual blessed white ones in the battle (an early temple does not hurt to get the mages). you might even try to start a conquering party every turn.

I did some short check and i was able to get 15 provinces in a year, and this is not that bad, especially as i did it in 5 minutes. The slowing down of expansion did happen as one of my expanding party (10 tigre riders and a brahmin) got defeated, as the brahmin said hy to an arrow.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

One thought. If you start a game on a 2-space map - one space ulm, one space bander log - then bander log probably loses unless I'm missing something. But make it a 2 person game with 500 areas, and ulm doesn't even get to bander log for a long time.

One other thought - everybody here is so quick with telling the bander log player to micro-manage a ton of patrolling forces - that doesn't sound like a lot of fun, even if it is viable.

One question - has anybody here played Bander Log and done well in MP? Even if it's not a win, it's a start.

-Jeff

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Hint, the bandar player wont have to micromanage patrollers, as his army of elephants will siege ulms castles, and dual blessed tigre rider raiding parties will either be raiding ulm, or conquer back raided provinces one by one (and yes, the tigre riders will be able to kill 17 armoured archers and one commander)

If ulm wins this, bandar log did something very wrong.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

The second thought and the first thought were not connected. In the first thought, I'm pointing out that PD is more important when you start close to each other, and less important when you spread out.

In the second thought, I'm pointing out that when you have many people on many fronts, it is annoying to keep patrols around parrying someone else's jabs, especially when they play guessing games with you.

I'm not saying it isn't doable, but it sure doesn't sound fun.

-Jeff

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Actually PD is more important for large maps because on small maps you're more likely to have a traveling army nearby any raids. As the map grows in size it becomes harder and harder to effectively protect those provinces with nearby armies thus relying more on PD.
Much harder tackling a sneaking strike army across 300 provinces compared with 30 provinces.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

When I have misfortune 3 you get alot of barbarian attacks, knight, troll attacks as random events. This is a little like someone constantly raiding you. I create 1 or 2 cloud trapezing/teleporting/flying thugs/SC's who deal with it all no problem.

They take out raiding forces just as easily.

PD is not very important in MP and plays a very, very, very minor role in deceiding a winner.

Not personally played Kailasa/Bandar Log and Patala but they look okay to me. Elephants/longbows and sacreds are always good.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

My tests show that 17 Heavy Infantry, or 17 Heavy Archers with an independent commander will regularly route 20 Patala PD with 1 or 2 casualities even when the Patala PD is in a friendly Dominion. National troops with kite shields and decent armour would be worse.

It is a sub-function of the game that got overlooked. It is easy to fix and I have no idea why people are upset over it being a real problem in a small number of cases. Are they worried that these races will become all powerfull if their PD is raised to a level comparable with others? Once PD has reached a certain level of power, increased strength really doesn't matter much. Below that level, it does. PD can't be scripted, thus a well put together army with mages will always beat it. But that's isn't the point of PD. The point of PD is to beat very small attacks.

Markata have a Morale of 7, a MR of 8, a strenght of 5 and 5 hitpoints. Yet they are given a gold piece price of 5. This has caused the 30 gold per point of PD system to give a very weak PD to Patala. Further, their complete lack of equipment makes this even worse.

My contention was that Kailasa/Bandar Log/Patala PD is easily defeated because of the morale failure of the Markata, they only have 7, long before any other PD is very testable and provable. Because the Markata are present in far larger numbers than the other troops, when the Markata rout the other troops route as well, because of the 75% rout rule. Tests of the last two hours prove this out. Machaka PD is also very weak. However, since Machaka is also viewed as a troubled nation, this is hardly evidence that my other opinions are wrong. But yes, it is difficult to prove the other contentions.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Which is why my pretender will be large and have a fear effect.

Since I can design my pretender specifically to trash your only way of fighting back, elephants, not so much a problem. However, your elephants could cower behind your dominion.... that would make it a little harder.

Oh wait, double blessed white ones. Did you know a pretender with fire can cast resist fire and be immune to the AP damage of fire blessed weapons?

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

And Ulm's Large Pretender with fear effect will destroy the Elephants.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

If you take dom 10 you even get +2 Awe and will be completely immune to elephants.

the Bandar player could just mix his elephants with high morale troops, and they would not rout.

With Bandar Log you can also go for S9W9 or other blesses, you have no need to take fire.

and btw. even when your pretender cant be killed, he will autorout when the white ones with dual bless would have killed your PD.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Don't you think it's a nice and interesting thing that the nations vary so much in many different ways, including the strength of their PD?

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

My comments have simply been PD is more important on larger size maps compared with smaller sized maps... and that DOM_4 could use upgrade options.

From my experience Misfortune 3 is noticeably worse than Misfortune 2 and not worth the point difference.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Not making any specific comments to this topic.. I find it simultaneously nice that the different races are different... the game does not have balance by making every race identical. I do sometimes feel like I wish it had more balance though.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Dont let the rage abate! Keep the thread going!

Hahahah. like 100 posts on this one alone

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Indeed, one has to salute Lord_Bob as a master troller. It's no mean feat getting people more worked up over markaka than helhirdlings. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Markata are the most powerful unit in the entire game. The entire game!

My sc with the stone sword will kill himself after swinging it 50 times. The most effective way in the game of killing him is 51 markatas, at 255 gold. Plz Nerf Markatas.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Since somehow it looked like my kind played a small part in causing this, I should point out that my case of the monkey nations (Aside from Lanka) being weak is that their troops are poor precision low protection chaff for the most part and as a result difficult to early expand with on a consistent one province a turn basis. Elephants make up but Bandar chaff isn't as good as say wingless. The VQ was actually suggested because I didn't want to pick the Ghost King since when I wrote the guide, the GK was by far the best SC chassis but I thought VQ would be fun since Patala can get away with taking neg scales since their nationals aren't too great. I don't know how Kailasa/Bandar Log plays out because Lanka blows Kailasa out of the waters and Bandar Log has some problems on magic diversity. The monkey nations have poor PD but really I think their main problem is, their infantry (aside from broken Elephants) are just overpriced for what they do. The longbows cost 20 gold for larger easier to hit targets with lower precision. Against elemental battlemagics, monkey troops just disappears. To say nothing about good archer platoons early on. Once you get to late game though, they're awesome especially EA/LA with clammable mages off the bat and the astral to use it but it's getting there that's pretty tough.

I think Lordbob has some valid points about how PD can play a role in the success of a nation. PD that's hard to raid is very very annoying to deal with but that's not the main flaw of monkeys.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Well put.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

I went back and counted the little monkeys. I then built a slightly better raiding force.

For 20 PD, Patala has:
40 Melee Markata
20 Bow Markata
10 Melee Atavi
10 Bow Atavi
1 Atavi Commander
1 Bandar Commander

this can be beaten by:
1 Independent Commander
6 Heavy Human Independent Infantry
8 Archers(any type) behind the heavy infantry

That's it. 170 Gold

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

I thought this sounded an awful lot like all these Helheim threads from the start. They even proposed to do a test game, one against one, to undermine and proof their theories, see.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Ulm would like to introduce your Elephants to his little friend, Mr. Flail. Really, Bandar Log troops are poor, Ulm troops are strong, and elephants don't make up the difference.
One on one, there won't be a mid-game for MA Ulm to lose miserably.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Please, just play out this game already. I'm tired of hearing about the imaginary war, I want to hear the results of the real war. Or, you know, the real imaginary war. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Death bless will molest ulmish troops and pretender, end of story. Afflictions up the wazzoo, with mr based an attack.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Whatever pretender you build there is a counter (not to mention your pretender cannot be everywhere). Also the bandar log player is allowed a pretender of his own you know.

Edit: I feel we have argued this as far as it will go, if you want to test the ulm v bandar log deal feel free to send me a pm.

Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
 

Want to play Top Trumps? Before we start, I should point out I've memorised the deck, so you lose. See you around.