![]() |
Re: Some ideas: raiding, seiging, spell AI and mor
Whine, whine, whine, *****, *****, *****.
There are too many strategies in Dominions II, and I cannot deal with most of them! I especially cannot deal with more than one applied at the same time. Lets change the rules we know to something completely untested, and hardly making any sense! Lets remove any magic strategy that has been used against me with any success! I wanna play with knights, archers and groundpounders, although I think that knights should lose the charge bonus, and the attack rear command should be disabled. Whahhh! Guys, if you do expand quickly, you will lose the game. If you do not build reaction forces, you will lose the game. If you do not make alliances that benefit both parties, you will lose the game. If you do not have some hoarding strategy you will lose the game. If you do not have a good idea about what your opponents are doing, you will lose the game. If you do all the above, you may still lose the game. And if all of the above are removed, the people who are kicking your *** will adapt, and still kick your ***. Only, Dominion II will be a lot less fun... |
Re: Some ideas: raiding, seiging, spell AI and mor
Pardon me but it is certainly MORE fun with no hoarding. More possible strategies, less micromanagement. its a NO-BRAINER.
But you belong to the reactionary "nothing is broken" crowd. I'll bet you thought the VQ was dandy. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif You seem to think that Illwinter have created the perfect game, perfect in all respects, in no need of tweaking/modding whatsover. Ah yes, truly, ignorance is bliss! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif |
Re: Some ideas: raiding, seiging, spell AI and mor
Quote:
|
Re: Some ideas: raiding, seiging, spell AI and mor
Reactionary and conservative are quite synonymous terms.
As a quick source to back up my use of the word, here is a definition from dictionary.com: "Characterized by reaction, especially opposition to progress or liberalism; extremely conservative." The term you are looking for is "revolutionary" which is the opposite of "reactionary". |
Re: Some ideas: raiding, seiging, spell AI and mor
Quote:
|
Re: Some ideas: raiding, seiging, spell AI and mor
Quote:
|
Re: Some ideas: raiding, seiging, spell AI and mor
Quote:
sticking the Last two on the former is no more micromanagement than any other strategy requires. And please explain to me how _removing_ a strategy opens up more strategies? Or are you one of the deluded fools who think that any strategy is a garantee for success? Because in one game, I'll end up facing someone who is hoarding at least clams and devils, and most probably fetishes, judging from the fortified temple in each province of hers. Oh, by the way, she also is second in provinces and research, and has supercombatants, and a wished pretender. And you know what? I do not intend to let her win the game. Quote:
and the 'Can't stand rebels without a clue' crowds. Or so I like to think. Care to prove me wrong in a 1x1? Quote:
underpriced. At the time, I did not consider myself good enough to be positive. I have fielded VQs in a MP game twice. Once after the VQ nerf was announced, to see what the big deal is, and once after the nerf, to win the tournament's semi-final against the most vocal anti-VQ crusader. I have not used her since, because I find her horribly overpriced. Quote:
clueless losers. Quote:
finding my own happiness in winning. Once again, care to play a game so that we can both indulge? |
Re: Some ideas: raiding, seiging, spell AI and more..
Quote:
Labs may usually be in fortified provinces, but also consider the more common situation when people use scouts as gem carriers for large armies. It doesn't make sense to me that a mage wouldn't try to replenish his gem supply mid-turn before a major battle (having spent his gems in a magical battle). I doubt that an AI would accomplish this satisfactorily, though (but maybe worth a try). With a limited gem supply, gems may go to the wrong mages, or be distributed in insufficient numbers. Quote:
Gem generation would happen before dominion change under my system (not sure what the turn order is currently), so your number of active generators would be predictable from turn-to-turn. An overall limit may be better in terms of micro-managing. It would, however, allow more of an all-eggs-in-one-basket type approach for the hoarder, made effective by use of domes. A simpler limit could be that any null or enemy-dominion province has a limit of one active generator. Dominion pushing as a tool against hoarders could be interesting, might add something to the game. |
Re: Some ideas: raiding, seiging, spell AI and mor
Quote:
For EXAMPLE: Soul contracts invalidate huge swathes of blood summons. Most never get used becuase it is much much much more cost effective to create soul contracts. Quote:
Worse, there is exactly ZERO strategy involved in hoarding. It is simple administrative work. Tedious. But sadly neccessary. Why not simply have all magic sites double in output every 20 turns? You would get the same effect, and not have to work for it... AND nations which are inherently bad at hoarding wouldn't take it in the teeth as much. Quote:
|
Re: Some ideas: raiding, seiging, spell AI and mor
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:57 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.