Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

I know this was mentioned a while back but I think it should get more attention. I agree that there should be a way to partially regrow devastated provinces and growth scale is probably the best choice. I believe that in nature, populations grow in a kind of "S" curve - the growth rate increasing exponentially before slowing down again and finally stopping when it reaches a ceiling determined by the environment. It would be interesting if there was a way to include this in dominions.

Now that I think of it though, games don't last very long, only a few years, so a model of long term growth like this might not be realistic after all. Just some thoughts.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Growth in dominions is exponential.
It's just that even with growth-3 it's just 1.006^n http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

It's called 'bell curve' .
Why not realistic ? It's a matter of massaging the numbers until it's playable. Currently Growth scale is pretty much unplayable. Supply was nicely balanced in Dom2, I had to actually look before stepping into a mountain or wasteland. Now I rarely bother.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

It would be cool if different nations had different base growth. Humans would be pretty high, Heims would be bad, Abysia and Fomoria and Agartha would be dismal. Caelum and C'tis could get a surge of growth only in the spring.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

The "S" curve he mentioned was regarding the total population. Obviously, total population over time does not follow a bell curve.
The case he described does "contain" a bell curve, with "growth rate over time" following a bell-like curve.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Yep, the bell curve is the differential (gradient) of the s-curve. The s-curve is often called a sigmoidal curve, sigma being the greek s.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Wow, Your ideas (Saulot, llamabeast and Endoperez) sound promising. Maybe we can spawn a dedicated thread to brain storm a new *different* (probably modded) nation for dominions along the lines of one of the ideas you've suggested.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Undeath discussion:
That sounds fine WraithLord. I guess that would go in the mod forum. I confess I have no time to contribute actual work (outside of thinking/speculation) for a long while.

Oh, also as a suggestion to just improve undead overall (which would also slightly tweak up Ermor), soulless should probably have a secondaryeffect disease on their weapon (fist / claw usually?). They are after all, a walking corpse.

About the population discussion:
Well, it's certainly true that the games don't last long enough to really show population changes into a different generation, and so vast differences in the populations doesn't make much sense.

Furthermore, during a game of Dominions is the 'time of the Chaos War' as I like to call it, when a pretender rises to dominance, and there should be much turmoil, death, and destruction of the peoples.

However, this is a game of magic, in a land with magic, and magic should provide an answer. There should probably be some sort of province enchantment which produces, let's say 50 to 500 more people per turn (probably a nature spell). As a province enchantment, this should prevent abuse or inbalance, and if priced correctly would likely only be used in situations which really warrant it.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

What about a nation of dragons? Ranging from humanoid dragon-kin (I'm thinking AD&D Dragonlance draconions) all the way to full on ancient dragons (which would be SCs at or above the level of Niefel Jarls). In between you have the most powerful of the dragon-kin and the very youngest of the dragons, which can be your stock mages and your non-mage commanders. The whole thing can be summonable (x gems for 5 to 15 of the regular dragon-kin, which are your troops, x gems for 1 dragon-kin mage, and then LOTS of gems, and some research, for the full-on dragons). You can even make it multiple path based, and allow summoning of different kinds of dragons (like the dragon pretenders).

That'd be a non-gold based nation that I think would be pretty interesting, and different from anything out there.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Conquest of Elysiun uses the form of "few gems for troops, more gems for good commanders/special units, lots of gems for very good commander" extensively. The problem is that one good commander or small group of very good units is much better than lots of weak units.

Making gold-independent nation also has the problem that all nations will have money, and if they won't use it elsewhere they'll use independents a lot, castles a lot, can build temples everywhere and probably won't suffer from upkeep nearly as much as common nations.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Once upon a time (dom2) I toyed with a choir nation. It would have been based on the Call God mechanism to summon angels ranging from Putti to Angels of the four hosts to unique angels, with a little bonus if the paths of the Singer or Matster of Harmony matched what they were calling. The Celebrants were troops that could join a Singer and there would obviously been spell songs. The troops were weak and the mages overpriced but calling units whose priestly abilities would let them call more units would probably have made it a late game powerhouse.

Another non-standard economy could be your basic d&d goblins. The troops would freespawn but cost upkeep so you have to keep attacking your neighbors. Although this might not work too well given the clever ways people found to dispose of militia. Hmmm...

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

dragons are famous gold-hoarding - make the upkeep costs for units and commanders 10x normal.

and yes, quality over quantity is a big effect in this game, but if you balance the costs and don't make the units *too* absurd you should be fine. I mean, Niefelheim can produce a jarl every second turn at the beginning, and it doesn't take long to get the income going to produce one every turn.

you could also force the pretender to be one of the dragons, which have insanely expensive magic paths. You'd also have to be awake. This would mitigate the strength of your pretender or starting scales some, since you'd obviously be able to go 3 sloth.

there's a fix for every balance issue http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

I suggest to stop abusing this thread and move the discussion to this dedicated thread

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

I agree. I've always thought growth could do more for its namesake than it does. I also think it could without negatively impacting Ermor's gameplay/theme combo. What if when a pop reaches 100 or less, it is unrecoverable, but above that, it can be regrown with growth scales along a stronger curve like B0rsuk suggests? Would it hurt Ermor if it were possible for territories to be taken back from them if you can manage to prune their dominion?

Basically what would happen is
1) Ermor puts dominion in a province
2) Ermor captures the province
3) Ermor depletes the province heavily (but does not get it down to 100 or less)
4) Opponent retakes province
5) Opponent removes Ermor's dominion from province
6) Province regrows

This is probably pointless, but I just thought of it. Is that game breaking?

BTW, I'm real embarrassed none of us caught the Ermor pop bug. Not that I played Ermor much in Dom2, but as much as I like to point out inconsistencies in game behavior, I'm bothered that I never complained about Dom3 Ashen Empire (which I thought had way too much gold).

=$=

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/thr...o=&fpart=1

The above link is where I ran the numbers on growth and death domains and calculated the aggregate money changes over so many turns. First off, the extra 2% per tick of growth of money you make per turn is not insignificant. Secondly, Growth in the long run will equal order for as a money maker, with the break even point being around turn 42 for growth-3. Third, the real strength of growth as a money maker is to combine it with order-3. Then all the multipliers (21% for order, 6% for growth, and exponential population growth) combine for the biggest pay out in Dom3.

Don't get me wrong, early expansion is important than late game bounties, but its not something to be dismissed either.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

OmikronWarrior:

But you need to control that province for so many turns. AND have your dominion [prbaobly at least str 3-5] all the time. So that 42 turns is for capitol only.

I wish growth effect was 2-5 times bigger but with no income boost. Just boost by population growth. It could maybe also make population destroying spells weaker.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

42 turns is the length of time in which you need to hold a province (any province) for the money difference between order-3 and growth-3 to be a wash (not the actual turn number in which everything everywhere equals out), and after turn 42 growth looks a lot better (due to the nature of exponential growth). Your criticism is a bit misguided in that in order to benefit from Order-3 you need the same criteria, control of the province and a minimum dominion to move scales. Once this is achieved, 42 turns is a theoretical number in which money breaks even, with plenty of room for 'experimental deviation'. Obviously, not all provinces will be under you control for a full 40+ turns, and there is no easy way to calculate the exponential benefit of growth in the provinces you control for more than 40 turns (or 70 for that matter) averaged against those you'll hold much less. The bigger the game, the more advantageous growth becomes.

Of course, I pretty much went out and said if you need money for your early game than you want order-3, which may allow you to take more provinces and thus have more money over the course of the game (to say nothing of more magic gems). Yet, how often does pretender design end up as a 120 points to spend on either Order or Growth? Realistically certain nations require growth to keep their old age mages alive. My suggestion has always been to combine Order-3, Growth-3, and even temperature scales for maximum effect accross the board.

A dangerous line of thought. Check out this graph on wikipedia: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...xponential.png .

The green line represents exponential growth. It starts our relatively slow compared to other forms of growth, but towards the end skyrockets into the atmosphere. The danger with increasing the pop growth to much is it becomes simply overpowering. I set up another spread sheet on my PC to compare your suggestions: 2xs and 5xs the current population growth figures. Assumming Growth-3 (1.2% and 3%).

For 1.2%, the break even point (with out any income benefits) was turn 31. A population doubled after 58 turns, and tripled after 92. For 3%, the break even point was turn 13. Population doubled at turn 24, tripled at 38 turns, and after 100 turns, the population would be 20 times the original.

I do feel like growth should be strengthened, but playing with exponents can be dangerous. I'd like to see the income modifier changed to 3%/tick. That make positive scales strategies much more viable.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

OmikronWarrior:

How many turns you need now to double population with growth 1,2 or 3?

You have admitted that it gets good later. So you need to control that provinces for at least 25-30 turns to see a real difference in income from growth. That's really a lot. It will affect provinces you got in early game but you won't benefit from new ones. And you will have Order bonus from newly acquired provinces when you spread your dominion there. Does order also increase income from gold mines etc?

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Omikron warrior, by 22-23 turns a province held in growth 3 should have an income equal to that of a order 3 province with growth 0.

It should take about 100 turns to double population with growth 3.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

I did some fiddling with this earlier - direct tests on early expansion with and without growth 3. The difference I was paying for was an asleep versus imprisoned pretender (who was mostly just a 9/6 bless vehicle). The difference in early expansion was actually substantial - do not underestimate the value of that +6% income. I would say that on any nation that doesn't need the resources, take sloth 3 and growth 3, as growth will substantially improve your income (this assumes you don't have anything more pertinent to spent those 120 points from sloth on, and that you're already at order 3).

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

My "break even" is a bit more comprehensive then that. Current income might be equal after so many turns, but I take into the "lost" income from not having +21% the whole time. Thats where I get my 42 turn figure from. At that point you have made just as much money as had you picked Order-3, Growth-0. Feel free to link I gave above and the spreadsheet to make sure my math is right.

As for when population doubles with growth-3, its an easy calculation to make. 1.006^x=2, or x=ln2/ln1.006, or x=115.9.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Growth: +1 +2 +3 +4 = +10
Order: +2.5 +2.5 +2.5 +2.5 = +10

Total extra gold for growth and order may be the same up to the breaking point, but growth allows you to invest it early. Lies, damn lies, statistics ! Breaking point is the breaking point only for people who sit idle scratching their backs. Another advantage of Order is that it quickly covers your newly conquered provinces. Looking at it this way, Order may actually pay more in the long run than Growth does. Not only Growth benefits mostly your core provinces, but it also benefits your enemy if he captures your territory. Order, on the other hand, disappears from your provinces when your enemy conquers them (destruction of temples, prophets, pretenders, enemy builds his own temples etc) And I'm pretty sure it makes your territory easier to invade, because it provides supplies for enemy army ! (The fact that no one noticed this before is a testament to the pointlessness of supplies in Dom3)

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Ah ok.

¨
There used to be, and still is as far as I know, a 1.001 base growth at growth scale 0. Which is where I got the 100 turns, as in (turns)=ln2/ln(1.007)

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

I have been playing LA Ermor for over a year. I switched when my other test factions consistently ran into trouble against Ermor. (Of course the idea was to understand the enemy so he is more easily defeated.) My conclusion was that LA Ermor is an extremely subtle nation to play; that is, it is always on the edge, and one miscalculation can sink it.

The population change is just another variable in a game of hundreds of degrees of freedom. Apparently it was "traditional" and it has been restored. To we LA Ermor players, it only means we have to adjust our strategy.

Frankly, I am a hard ***, and I do not take crap from any other players. I take the Lord-of-the-Rings point of view and tell other players, "The dead do not suffer the living." [The Return of the King.] If you attack me early, you can be guaranteed that neither of us will survive. If you find support in your attack, others will grow stronger while you defeat me.

Frankly, Ermor is a conundrum: Damned if you attack, and damned if you wait.

For my part, the new population rules mean it will be harder for ME to keep up a blood pool.

In any event, you'll have to pry those 15 death gems from my cold tight hand.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

There appears to be no base growth. I just tested it, it's suposed to happen every single turn, not every 2 turns or anything like that, right ? 30370 in Man capital. One turn later, 30370. I vaguely remember Kristoffer being surprised that there's no longer base growth, and later saying something along the lines that it's ok because it makes growth more useful, it's end times, not much time passes between turns so it's realistic, etc.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

My two cents.
I'm palying a 5 players mp and one is Ermor. The game started before the patch. None attacked Ermor early but soon we formed an alliance of four vs Ermor. Now, around turn 40, it's too late. We started attacking him around turn 15, but the combination ermor plus gold is unstoppable. He has lot of castles, lot of temples, lot of indy mages. If he had only huge undead armies and death spells he would be manageable, now isn't. Btw, I'm R'lyeh and I would be a good anti ermor having cheap fodder and good spells. I had very good start too. But now there is no match.
I agree with increase of pop death in ermor so to have (at least) its income crippled.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

No, it should be every turn. And since you checked the capital it should have enough pop to make an impact as well, as long as you didn't recruit?

So I guess it got removed somewhere along the line, in which cas Omi's number is correct and it takes 115 turns to double pop with growth 3.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Wait - does recruiting a unit lower population by 1? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif If not, what does this mean?

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Well it used to reduce pop, once upon a time, apparently it doesn't anymore. It reduced it with more than 1 though, as I recall.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

I'm not hardcore or anything, but my preference the past few months (not worrying about getting turns in on time, etc.) has been to play with 6-10 AIs, random, on mighty with various maps, and if LA Ermor's around - the game is over as Ermor beats the crap out of any AI around it.

Something's wrong with the SP balance.

Or shall none of us ever play SP again? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Ermor has always been a special case other AI's don't know how to deal against. At least we know have access to two eras in which there are no dominion-killing nation that spawn thousands of troops out of thin air.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

I have tried a solo game with the "new" dominion.
Really difficult without some high gold events : can't by any castle after the 20 first turns

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

then you're doing something wrong...even with no gold events I can have a castle and a temple on turn 7, and have enough cash to start another castle on the following turn.

try increasing your taxes to 200% in every province, and make sure you take farms and other high-income provinces near your capital ASAP, to maximize income before your dominion wipes out the population.

also, with the increased dom kill I think you're pretty much forced into taking luck 3 (as though you didn't have the points to spare) for the gold events.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Luck +3 is mandatory. It will be your greatest generator of gold (particularly after you cast Utterdark), {you WILL won't you?} as the gold you acquire during "events" will be real and not modified by Utterdark's 90% reduction.

In a recent game I had a double, "3000 gold and a magic item" in one turn! (Under Utterdark!)

I used to go luck -3 for the magics, but as long as you have a Pretender with something in *all* paths, there is no real advantage to the extra points. (The reason is to avoid the 50 gem 'penalty' for getting into a magic path.)

===========================================
With the change, you should go +200% taxation in all provinces, to extract the maximum income, and to ruin it for anyone else who decides to conquer it.
Taking a province is one thing... Keeping it is another.
Bwaaaaaaa--ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.
(Excuse me: Ha!)
=================================================
In the end, Ermor is a freak. Worse yet, everyone hates it (just as everyone, including Ermor, hates R'Lyeh). Against R'Lyeh your troops/commanders go insane in its dominion. Against Ermor, (their) troops/commanders starve. The difference is that starvation is curable, and insanity is not.

Viva la mort!

Oh yeah, and to answer mathusalem, what are you building so many castles for anyway? If you have Soulgate up all you need a temple (400 as opposed to 800 gold) and you'll get freespawn priests that will crank out undead by the thousands. Not only that, your only 3 sources of dominion increase are: Pretender; Prophet; temples. [OK, you can buy living priests to preech as well, but you have to pay upkeep!] But you can only recruit a (living) priest where you have built a temple anyway.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Castles freespawn the better Roman legionnaire undead.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Yeah, but at 800/1000 gold a pop? I spend that on providence defense and not castles. The problem with castles are they are transient: yours today, someone else's tomorrow. Then you have to bother with a siege to get it back. Just ugly all around.

------------------------------------------------

Oh, one of the things I forgot to say is that Ermor's new/original death rate pretty much makes it impossible to have a blood economy. Kind of tough to pull virgins out of a population zero province.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

Just lol.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

PD is more transient than castles are - you can't reclaim it.

Re: LA Ermor\'s Dominion Change in 3.15...
 

True, Gregstrom, but it does not switch sides and it weakens an opponent.