Re: Dev Thinking on Balance?
 

Wow, it's so heartwarming to see a dev give me a compliment. Thanks. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Now, as to the other random comments:

Flames, nuff said. Moving on.

Regarding the early expansion advantage of the VQ, I feel that she offers the fastest and best early expansion when compared against the other advantages and disadvantages of other Pretenders and other phases of the game. As pointed out, Pretenders like the White Bull and the Shedu are just as powerful early, but they suffer from a few problems the VQ doesn't. Among them is the debility to gather afflictions (thus possibly crippling them for early-expansion purposes), and a severe lack of slots for later in the game. The VQ suffers neither of these problems. (The Shedu also suffers from enforced Astral magic.)

For me, 13 of 17 players choosing the VQ for MP games shows a clear perception of imbalance (regardless of whether that imbalance exists). If all the education on this forum does not change this fact, then it's time to collect some hard data.

For example, record the percentage of VQs being played in MP games. Then, implement methods to reduce the _perceived_ imbalance of the VQ (such as explaining to people why she's not all that). Then, take another sampling of the percentage of VQs being played, normalized for the entrance rate of players into the game. That is, if in the beginning 75% of MP players play with VQs, and after methods, you still have 75% of MP players playing with VQs, it doesn't necessarily mean that the methods aren't working. The 'VQ is God' way of thinking may simply be a mode that players go through that marks their maturity in the game. That's why you need to make sure that your numbers aren't falling prey to changes in the player base.

Now, if the %age increases even after such normalization, then it seems clear that there is an imbalance issue.

When it all comes down to it, Pretender selection shares a lot of common elements with what is termed 'the metagame' in CCG circles. Dominions II shares quite a few interesting similarities with CCGs, in that the number of options you have before play begins are large enough to create a number of different strategies, all theoretically equally viable. This would suggest that taking a similar approach to solving issues of metagame balance in CCGs might work to solve these issues in Dominions II.

Anyway, just some ideas.

Re: Dev Thinking on Balance?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Won't she have problems against those nasty tritons? And I wonder about undead indies as well.

Re: Dev Thinking on Balance?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Tritons can be a problem, the undead aren't likely to, since they have trouble getting through ironskin.

Re: Dev Thinking on Balance?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well in my defense, since it's my VQ you have killed a few times, there are many factors involved that make this a poor example in your defense of the VQ not being imbalanced. Firstly, your Allfather has at least 3 wishes into him while my VQ has 0. You have wished for power once and magic power at least twice. Secondly, he is decked out in full gear and mine was naked (except one time where she had looted an Ice Devil the turn before). Thirdly, she isn't difficult for you to kill because you control every Arch Devil, Ice Devil, Global Enchantment and probably 100 clams or so. You also have at least 3x the number of provinces I do. You have defeated my armies with your Devil SCs and most of my casters using seeking arrows and other rituals. The amazing thing is that my VQ is still able to kill your SCs with -1 in all its paths while your SCs are fully geared, high exp and in the Hall of Fame.

Using this an example of how the Allfather is as balanced as the VQ is a reeeeeeeeeeeeal stretch.

The first time my VQ met your Allfather he had already had at least 3 wishes cast on him and my VQ was naked and still won. You most likely spent more design points on your Allfather (starting astral6, high Air and other paths)than I did and it still lost to a naked VQ with just mistform, ironskin and quickness on it.


Now to respond to all the naysayers, the reason that I believe the VQ is overpowered for its cost is that it provides an immense reliability. As long as you have dominion in a province there is absolutely no risk in sending in a naked VQ to conquer it or defend it. With every other pretender except the liches and the phoenix who also share immortality, there is a *risk* of them gaining a crippling affliction *and* a risk of them dying and losing magic paths and priest's time calling them back.

I've experimented with other pretenders, but the ones that lack immortality just seem too risky to rely on to get the job done with current balance. Cyclops gets "lost his only eye" in the first turn of combat against indies, what do you do? Losing your pretender to knights early in the game is crippling unless you have a VQ (or phoenix or lich). Are you required to play Arco if you want to use a non-Immortal Pretender in the early game?

The VQ provides a more than decent combatant with VIRTUALLY NO RISK in use. It removes the luck factor that plagues any other Pretender choice. There is a risk, even if it's slight, when you send a non-immortal pretender into any province with enemy units.

What would I do as a dev? I would give all pretenders recuperation, or at least the ones that I consider to be combat pretenders. Give people a chance to keep in the game with an early affliction. Death would still be a risk, and excessive afflictions would still keep a pretender out of commission a few turns. On the other hand, as a dev if I wanted to see less people using SC pretenders, I would remove immortality from all Pretenders or change the way it works.