Re: Why are Sages fair? Opinions wanted!
 

Taking that chance pays off way too often. T'ien Ch'i has great researchers, but while using them is an option they are not needed because sages are available and easier to build (only lab, no frot/temple).

I think nerfing sages would take away one option (drain/zero-magic relying on Sages to research) and make lots of others resonable choices.

Re: Why are Sages fair? Opinions wanted!
 

Once you include an Owl Quill (+3) and the +1 exp bonus you get after 10 turns or 2 battles, sages are not so advantageous.

Sage, 1 star, owl quill: 11 rp @ 90g
Generic 1-magic mage, 1 star, owl quill: 7 rp @ 60g

That comes to .55 rp/gold/turn versus .57 rp/gold/turn, which is trivial. I always give my researchers quills unless I have no access to air. Really, one of the big plusses of sages is that you get a random pick for only 90 gold, which is great for opening up new possibilities.

Edit: I can see sages going up to 100g or even 110g, just because they are such a nice combo of a research bonus and a cheap random pick. However, I think the game plays out fine without changing them at all. If I had a choice between a sage province versus a druid province versus and amazon province versus a bloodhenge druid province... it would probably be a toss-up.

Re: Why are Sages fair? Opinions wanted!
 

Oops, double post...

Re: Why are Sages fair? Opinions wanted!
 

Hey, Saber Cherry is back! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Only some nations have that cheap mages. The thing is, the cheap mages should be a bonus, not something almost as useful as sages in their specialty and often less useful because their paths are covered by stronger mages.

Maybe sages are too useful with true random and research bonus 4? Would they still be as useful with Astral 1, res. bonus 3? Would any other path suit them better, so that they cannot be used as a magic duel fodder against Tien Chi/Marignon, or communion slaves?

some editing...

Re: Why are Sages fair? Opinions wanted!
 

Just wanted to make a few comments.

First, Sages are obviously one of the most efficient researchers in the game. As others have pointed out, the only better (as in, more efficient) researchers (generally) are the Daughter of Avalon and the Philosopher. These are both capital-only commanders for a specific theme. Thus, you could argue that the Sage is the most efficient commonly-available (with exactly how available subject to change) researcher in the game. The fact that it is available on a random basis tends to make me believe it is too powerful.

The other point I would like to make is that there is no price increase for a commander being sacred. If he has priestly powers, he is charged for them, but not for simply being sacred. I found this out when I calculated the projected cost/actual cost ratio of all the mages in the game.

Re: Why are Sages fair? Opinions wanted!
 

Question for all: At what cost would you have to think twice about building sages in the first 40 turns of a game?

Like perhaps:
80 gold - Of course, build them by the boatloads!
110 gold - Probably build several when the gold starts coming in, for the research gets so much harder to make it to the higher and higher levels.
140 gold - Build a few because all you need is the lab to boost your research, but much prefer other choices.
170 gold - Never build one.

Any opinions?

They are still useful for the one random pick regardless of the research bonus. It is especially nice to get a blood sage when you are not a blood nation.

One other thing is that the other neutral mages sure seem FAR less common than sages. I would guess libraries have a higher probability to appear than other type sites.

Re: Why are Sages fair? Opinions wanted!
 

Interesting last post (earlier ones as well, but particulary the last one).

Not less common, but library is not hidden. That makes a huge difference I believe. Hiding it would give astral nations a great advantage though.

Re: Why are Sages fair? Opinions wanted!
 

For me, it's not so much the gold cost as the research and the gold I have available. To answer that question 'properly', I'd have to say, 'If I were Ulm, A; if I were Pythium, B; etc.'. That doesn't really help.

One way you could answer that question is to look and see how much 7 RPs costs, by the tabulation method given by Illwinter. That comes to 5 magic picks. 5 magic picks costs at least 110g (30+20+10+10+10 for the magic, 30 for the commander). (Yes, the Master of the 5 Elements is horribly overpriced, by this method.) A more reasonable 2/2/1 split comes in around 200g, IIRC.

Of course, those Mages are much more useful than Sages in a non-research role, so you couldn't cost him that high.

OTOH, you have the indisputable fact that you can recruit them at a lab-only province (no Fort needed) in their favor. In here you would also have to weigh the fact that they're not tying down your capital's commander production.

On balance, I'd have to say... 130g, probably. That puts in on about an even keel with most independent mages (site or non-site), while also charging something closer to the price of a mage that can research that high and do better magic.

Now, this means that the Wizard and Loremaster would have to have a commensurate raising in their price. But that is only fair.

Anyway, I hope that this answers your question.

Re: Why are Sages fair? Opinions wanted!
 

What about eliminating the Magic Level from the Sage, and give them strictly the research component? You wouldn't build 40-50 of them because once everything you want is researched they would be useless.

Re: Why are Sages fair? Opinions wanted!
 

In this event, I probably still would pay for them, because it gets me my spells quicker, and I can always dismiss/kill them to avoid their upkeep when I'm through using them.

Bottom line, if I have money I can spend to get a researcher, I'm going to use it, given any reasonable amount. More research is more research.