Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Quite frankly, if PD ever succeeds against a human player I think it says more about the attacking player than the defending nation http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Seriously, a well scripted mage should be capable of burning through any reasonable amount of PD in short order, unless you're investing silly money into the PD. Even then, your relying on the chance of the mage either KO'ing himself with fatigue or simply lacking mass destruction spells to deal with the number of targets.

Oh, and sacred PD is only good if the AI happens to choose bless rather than holy avenger or similar.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Because with some nations with very weak provincial defence you can't really see their strengthes in any other area, maybe.

I think Fomoria tops it:

-The provincial defence can not hit anything, has no protection or defence and a moral so absoluely horrible that it will rout the whole army.
-At the same time, the only good researcher/Ritualist is capital only. (and still no better then average compared with other nations)
-The only good unit is capital only.


And seriously, Banda Log is another good point. The provincial defence is sooo bad, comparing it to a good average is like comparing the sacret units of MA Ulm and MA Vanheim.
Problem is, that a sacret strategy is optional - Provincial defence is something you need no matter what strategy you are going.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Not really. I never bother with PD for Caelum (no point, Caelum's troops need scripting to be any use), and it's rare I put in more than four or five PD with most nations.
For those wondering, I find it more effective than the traditional 20 PD for putting off players looking for an easy victim. Just make sure they think the cash you've saved has went on your army instead http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Nations with good PD, such as EA Abyssia, tend to use it more because it can do a decent job. This can be a disadvantage as much as an advantage though - a couple of times I've foolishly invested in PD when actual troops would have been a better use of gold.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Caleum fliers are capable of rapidly countering such raids with their flying armies/mages. Stealth nations can "surprise and destroy" such armies. Also, they are capable of equal raids against normal PD with their stealth units, so it balances.

You not "needing" good PD because the enemy does not raid weakly is like saying the enemy didn't press the "I win!" button because there was no "I win!" button. A truism, yes, but not very important. If you have good PD, then stupid weak raids work as a surprise tactic exactly once. Then they stop working. It's not exactly surprising that your opponent doesn't build a strategy around something that doesn't work against you.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Uh,.. if a single stupid weak raid makes you go all nuts on PD and build 20 in every province because OMG 30 GOLD PER POINT, it already worked.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

In MP, I find that strong PD nations actually make the strategic decision more complicated. (Granted this is on the basis of having played exactly 3.5 MP games: Perpetuality = 1.5). If you know your PD is trash don't use it. Plop down PD 1 so scouts can't raid you and ignore the rest. But if you have good PD you have to decide whether or not to invest in it.

TC PD11 can stop most random event indy raids, for example. Prevents some income loss and diverting forces to retake provinces, but at the cost of a less mobile army.

But even here, the strategic decision never thinks PD v Human Opponent.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

If you don't even build a SINGLE point of PD, you will lose to any player worth his salt. Guaranteed. Qm and I have shown many newbier players to at least sink a point or risk losing provinces to a scout.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

As a slight but temporary hijack, I'd like to have you stop by the Fomoria thread I created.

I can't really disagree with the bulk of your post, and neither would I want to, but I'd like to discuss a few things with you before I decide whether to try them out in multiplayer. I don't have much experience with multiplayer- though I'm working on that continuously.

1). The only good unit is capital only? Certainly, unmarked troops and the giants and those nice nemedians are capital only, but are Fomorian Warriors just as bad? From their flavor it seems like they'd have a lower rate of afflictions. As well, unmarked champions are available everywhere as thugs. Certainly not Neifel Jarl or Dai Oni class, but do you consider those 'not good' as well? And while the Fir Bolg have several problems (helmet, anyone?) they seem solid with above average humanoid stats. I've had quite some success taking out indies with them, and I expect they'd be of some use against human nations.

2). I am rather appalled with their mages, though I do see some possibilities with Thunder Bow spam on the druids.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Fomorian troops aren't bad. Their javelins are pretty kick *** considering how cheap and survivable they are.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Some nations have mages as part of their PD... for example one nation has 1air and 1holy horsemen as commanders. As a result 3 rounds of combat with two of these PD mages usually results in 6 phantasmal warriors or banishing undead! Other nations have regular stand behind (do_nothing) commanders.

I don't mind seeing some nations with weaker PD, but hopefully DOM_4 will allow pretenders different options for upgrading existing PD such as improving the type of weapons being used, type of shields being used, and type of armor being worn, etc.