Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

A Jotun Jarl, not a Neifleheim Jarl, and 10 militias with poor protection, attack, defense, and morale. 20 PD for 10 units that really aren't all that better than human militia. A competent raiding force will route the militia and the jarl with it before he can be the least bit effective.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Not another thread like this...

Right. Markatas are lame (actually, markata's are the most cost-effective unit in the game, as detailed in the other thread...) and monkey nations have markatas as PD. Who cares? Bandar log also has amoung the best summons in the game, decent mages, good sacreds, decent archers, and elephants. Nations are not made up of PD alone, thank the gods.

MP results are a nonissue, since several naitons (20ish) have never won an MP game. Normal distribution dictates that until we have (significantly) more results than nations, they are statistically meaningless (oversimplifying, I know.)

Also, Bandar Log has reasonable antiraider potential, with several remote attacks, teleporting mages, flying summons, and PD that actually stops call of the winds.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

This is the thread that started it all. Legends will emerge about this thread, bards will write poems about it. The other one was just an attempt to get past 100 posts in one day in a tour de force.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

I thought the Giants were 30 gold. It turns out they are 20 gold giant militia. Yes, they do suck. Yes, Niefielim PD is bad and yet Niefielim has registered a win in EA. Of course, they also have uber-sacreds.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Niefelheim PD is very bad. I never rely on them. Throw a 5 in there, and send some Jarls in if you really need to defend it.

PD is certainly very different depending on the nation. I really like Pangaea's PD. They have those Harpies that go in early, and tie everyone up for a turn or two. They all die or rout, but it gives your other troops/commanders time to form up and cast spells.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Pangageas PD is like free casts of swarm every battle.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

This is an example of the "lower standard" of reasoning to which proving me wrong is held. Mictlan has quite acceptable PD. It has 3 Warriors per point. Each Warrior has decent morale and a hide shield to stop arrows. They also have a tribal king to Sermon Of Courage them. Sure, they can be beaten up by heavy infrantry, but they won't route easy and you'll have to kill most of the 60 to do it. Worse, after 20 they get Jaguar Warriors. In a typical game these Jaguar Warrior are Dual Blessed and will kill more than their number in heavy infrantry. Their counter, archers, work very poorly versuses Hide Shielded Mictlan Warrior.

Mictlan PD starts out "ok" and then goes to "frightenly deadly".

The statement that the Machaka are considered a "weak nation" is correct. In fact, it is held by most of the people reading the board. Including those who disagree with me. Another player even made a point of mentioning how bad Machaka PD is. So yes, quite, they are considered weak.

Caleum is able to dispatch flying attackers to retake any captured province from a central location. One of these forces can protect 15 or more provinces with three movement. A nation that doesn't have to have an army "adjacent" to the captured province to attack and retake it obviously has a nice advantage in retaking provinces. Also, the speed with which Caleum can move forces around make large scale raids very hard... without defeating their army first. Nations of Fliers are a poor comparison.

MA Man PD is poor, better by far than Monkey PD, but poor. Of course they also get a Bard, an actual spellcaster who can cast a morale booster before battle and nature spells throughout. But yes, MA Man PD is weak. Score one point. They also have not won a single game, but I believe that is because they completely lack magic diversity.

The other nations are new, and I'm not going to create a game just to check them.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

You are missinterpeting, hopefully in ignorance, that argument. Those nations have not yet won an MP game, hence invalidating your 'appeal to statistics' contention. As thejeff has already stated:
"Quote:
Lord_Bob said:
Are you actually claiming 20 Archers and a Commander can defeat a Man PD of 20 without casualities?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. Different claim.

None of those nations has won any of the MP games listed in the MP forum post you're using as evidence.

Nor has any age of Atlantis or Arcosephale."

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

During DOM_2 I originally enjoyed Machaka, but the weakest PD is more noticeably painful on my favorite type of maps(LARGE). Today I still joke that Machaka PD can be killed with tennis balls.
One benefit of these discussions on PD has made me realize DOM_4 should allow gamers a way to upgrade the PD via one or more of the following research, gold/gems, new -/+scale, building type, etc. This would add another layer of depth for gamers.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

I don't think Machaka is a weak nation. I like them. Also I've won an MP game using Man (although I didn't bother to submit it to the Victorious Nations thread since it was only a 4-player game).