Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

The one name that seems to pop up multiple times in relation to the VQ balance debate is Norfleet. Sure, lots of people seem to be using VQs in MP, but how well has anyone other than Norfleet actually done with them?

Is the whole debate generated by players who are frustrated at not being able to beat Norfleet when he plays a VQ?

How many people are playing VQs because they have heard of one player's success with them, yet cannot duplicate that success for themselves?

Please feel free to post results of your success, or lack thereof, with VQs here. Don't forget to mention the skill level of your opponents, please.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well Ive always said that there isnt a "best" nation or strategy in Dom2. Whats best is to find the combo which is most like your method of play. So maybe Norfleet has found his combo and is playing against many people who havent?

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

Heh.

Norfleet to my knowledge just pioneered the SC naked VQ castling and templing strat, he isn't *morally* responsible for it in some sinister way. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

The problem is the leverage between immortality, no per use investment+ no risk SC's... and dominion, especially for ermor, who recruits independent of scales.

I think he deserves a cookie for finding a way to break the game,... (keeps the balance faithful humble http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) but that doesn't mean we shouldn't repair the defect (and its derivable cousins), now that we know it exists. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif


Rabe the Suprised at the ad hominem.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Why do you do that? Is it reverse psychology? Do you maybe really NOT want it fixed?

[ May 06, 2004, 17:56: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Why do you do that? Is it reverse psychology? Do you maybe really NOT want it fixed? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">what?

rabe's post seemed pretty straight-forward http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

of course, many people have never encountered an adequate rendition of this strategy...

Anyways, the problem is certainly not Norfleet; which is not to say that Norfleet doesn't have problems... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

he did invent the pure strat as far as i can tell, and he is also very experienced w/ it, which does make it seem stronger than it otherwise might be. However, stronger than way too strong...

for instance, reading the supposed "counters" in the counter thread mostly make me laugh as, for the most part, they would be pretty useless, or require vast amounts of resources compared to the reward, when used against someone who has mastered this strat - for instance, Norfleet. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ May 06, 2004, 18:05: Message edited by: archaeolept ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

As far as I am concerned, Norfleet is the problem.
It is not impossible to beat a vampire queen, but
it is a pretty tall order to beat someone who is
significantly better than you.

I am a new player. I have played less than five
games outside of my circle of friends. In my
second game, Cohen obliterated my best army with
a single vampire queen. In my next game, I
raided his temples, my stealth preachers rolled
over his domain, and my pretender was a match
for his. He conceeded the game after losing
two castles.

Is the vampire queen one of the best pretenders?
Absolutely.

Is the vampire queen too much bang for the buck?
Possibly, I am not yet qualified to judge.

But if a total newbie like me can take on a
vampire queen in his third game and win, she is
no magic bullet. Yes, she wiped out the one
raiding party she caught. Yes, she is queen of
her own domain. Yes, she is very good at helping
early expension, yes, she allows you some peace
of mind with her immortality.

But guess what, we are playing a game about beings
that aspire to Godhood. It is normal that they
will be able to devastate armies of mere mortals,
especially in a province where the population's
belief empowers them. I love the way this all
fits with the theme of the game.

But something else that fits is that a God is only
as strong as his believers. A raided, pillaged,
besieged nation will fall.

I have since won another game in which the vampire
queen was used as a silver bullet. I got lucky,
and a unscripted petrify or paralize or something
nailed her. My opponent got frustrated and
quit...

But this is not how Norfleet and I assume every
skilled player will use her. No they will fortify
while expanding, they will hoard gems and mass
produce clams, they will raid and blood hunt even
when not a blood nation, and they use a stream
of annying summons to keep you of balance.

And you know what? They could do the same with
Odin, Shiva, a Carrior Dragon... you know what?
Maybe with a lucky Drott who rolled water
as his random pick and toughness as his heroic
ability.

Now do you honestly believe that when a much
better player beats you he only won by using
an unbalanced strategy? Now how many of you can
honestly say: "If I play Soul Gate Ermor with a
Vampire Queen, I will obliterate Vanheim led by
Odin... played by anyone"? Or Arcoscephale
led by Shiva?

The select few who can say this will probably
beat the rest of us anyway.

Now the Vampire Queen is good, and not that
expensive. And she combines a lot of nice things,
and maybe she needs rebalancing... But who will
be next in line for nerfing? I'll tell you.

Whoever the best players pick. If I were one, I
would pick a suboptimal pretender just to screw
with people. But the best players do not make
suboptimal choices...

... And probably do not write long rants. So see
you around.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

Well, I've run into several would-be imitators of the strategy, but ultimately, even without my own VQ, defeating it is rather like taking candy from a baby. In truth, the VQ isn't as powerful as its made out to be: Like any SC, it's very adept at destroying conventional armies, which a wide range of SCs of varying costs and availability do very well for comparable risk, and falls flat against certain other things.

The key to successfully using the strategy, like any other strategy, involves keeping your opponent off balance, never being sure entirely what to expect and where to expect it, and forcing him to respond to you on your terms.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Actually, I find many of those counters to be highly effective, given their cost. Obviously, how you assess cost vs. reward can vary widely. If you think about it, a VQ is, at least explicitly, "free". You don't have to pay gems for one. You have it from the start of the game. It's a freebie. So viewed from that perspective, ANY counter other than simply duelling it down with your own pretender costs SOMETHING, as opposed to the enemy pretender's nothing.

The question is: Do these proposed solutions represent a significant departure from tactics that you would otherwise be using ANYWAY?

In this respect, I'd have to say the answer is "no". Most of the proposed solutions are modular enough to be adaptable to any other related SC. Many of these solutions hold merit on their own as valid strategies with or without an SC. Sure, some of them are very contrived, but others are perfectly reasonable to employ as general strategies, particularly against SCs, many of whom utilize lifesteal, just as the VQ does.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'm sorry, but I can't claim credit for the naked VQ castling and templing strat. In truth, I employ the castling strategy independently of the VQ, and I don't really field the naked VQ as a strategy. Generally, I eschew the crutch of the immortality and field fully-equipped, armed-to-the-teeth VQs ASAP. That has only gone more slowly where YOU'VE encountered it because of Very Retarded Research combined with the fact that Ermor is really not a strong research nation. As such, the level of carnage I've managed to cause is somewhat limited.

Besides, you can barely even hit me!

So I'm not really "pioneering" the VQ/castle/temple strategy. I castle and temple out of an entirely seperate agenda. Arch will testify to the fact that I've fielded GKs based on similar builds with equally devastating effects. Frankly, this strategy works very well for ME because it fits perfectly with my personal idiom. I have yet to see anyone perform a truly successful imitation.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Why do you do that? Is it reverse psychology? Do you maybe really NOT want it fixed? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">what?

rabe's post seemed pretty straight-forward http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It is straight forward, I will grant it that. But seeing it posted in every thread using words like broken and defect and fix doesnt strike me as a way of getting the devs to agree. If it were me I would think it would have an oppossite effect. But I guess life, like this game, supports many strategys. I was just trying to figure this one out.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

yah, the mad castling/templing is really the core of Norfleet's strategic activities. Any uber-SC will work w/ it; its just that the VQ has more innate (and, in the case of immortality, unavailable to lesser pretenders) abilities.

I've only seen him use the GK once, actually. It was devastating but, OTOH, it was using R'lyeh before the paralysis bug was fixed, which rather compensated for the lack of a VQ.

I think my Last battle w/ his GK that game, turn 44 or so, his GK had a 40 defense before buffs http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

re. the counters thread: its more that most of what is discussed there presupposes catching the uber-VQ in open terrain in the mid to late game, which is not something I sea often. The VQ is hidden in the sea of castles for the most part, and if it does move out i'm not sure if an attack on her would occur before an "instant castle" spell like 7 red seconds takes place.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

I don't really have a huge problem with the VQ herself but to answer the question of the post...the answer is 'no'.

I say that because Norfleet hasn't been in a single one of the larger games I have played (and VQs are/were).

Also because VQ's are all over the place, irregardless of the nation and secondary strategy used. I don't think I have actually seen many people use a castling strategy. She is just used, generally, as a generic flying immortal SC http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Lastly, a lot of people build her completely differently than he does (he, himself, comments on how he wouldn't build one the way someone else did).

- Kel

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">There are other game strategys which involve trying to time the next attack your enemy will make and attack that same province at the same time. Its not an uncommon skill to try and develop. That would handle 7 red seconds

And if a tactic keeps her from leaving her castle then it would be a good thing. Most of her benefits are handled then. Late game has alot of spells that could help if you can keep her from winning the game too quick.

[ May 06, 2004, 19:39: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Why do you do that? Is it reverse psychology? Do you maybe really NOT want it fixed? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">what?

rabe's post seemed pretty straight-forward http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It is straight forward, I will grant it that. But seeing it posted in every thread using words like broken and defect and fix doesnt strike me as a way of getting the devs to agree. If it were me I would think it would have an oppossite effect. But I guess life, like this game, supports many strategys. I was just trying to figure this one out. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Gandalf, I'm working under the presumptive principle that the devs are thoughtful, mature adults, who, understanding complex sytems as they must to have created this marvelous game, realize that not every contingency can be anticipated, which is why such systems are interesting.

IMHO the strat in its most extreme form reduces the functional and strategic diversity of the game. A game we all treasure and with which we are positively obsessed !

I suspect from KO's reaction to hearing the strat described, that this degree of monotonic leverage was not forseen by the authors and is clearly counterparadigmatic.

I may be wrong. The devs may not agree, and I suppose there is a possibility that seeing me refer to the strat as "broken" (which is a technical CCG term, but perhaps should be explained more thoroughly with each use) will cause them to toss reason to the wind and obsteperously pile on immortal SC buffs until doomsday. (Which would indeed be arriving early http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif )

It seems unlikely to me, but if that's true then I misunderstand the devs, the game and the community.

I haven't insulted anyone, I LOVE this game.

To suggest that I am endangering balance by attempting to defend it is bizarre.

It seems vastly more disrepectful of the devs to suggest they are reactively perverse and fragile in response to constructive feedback than any contexual criticism I could make.

These are brilliant men, not cranks or emotionally stunted children.

How does taking their work seriously enough to be impassioned against its abuse count as counterproductive behavior?


Rabe the Mildly Offended

(and off to catch a plane...)

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Are these folks winning with their VQs? Or is there only one way of playing VQs that is really "broken?"

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

Dont back off now Rabi. Gandalf is just an old guy and wishes he can make us use our GOOD manners. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

You go ahead and pick anything in the game you want and dont use wimpy words like balanse or opinion or please look at. TELL them that there game is all broke and defektiv messed up (not the word I wanted but I changed it 3 times till I got one I thot might stay). Those 2 guys in the garage after work should change what PLAYERS say is broke and stop doing just what they want to do

[ May 09, 2004, 04:15: Message edited by: Wikd Thots ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well, the original qustion was whether most of the people in the debate were in it because of Norfleet. I don't think most of the people in the debate think she is broken, they just think she is over-powered.

I don't want to spread that thread across multiple threads so I will stick to strictly answering the question of whether they are using her because of Norfleet. And to me, all evidence is that this is not the case, for the reasons I mentioned. I can't account for everyone of course but I don't think a lot of these people have necessarily even played against Norfleet.

- Kel

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well I don't know that I'd go that far, myself. But I do think that, Gandalf, you're overreacting a bit. I don't see why Rabe shouldn't say he thinks the VQ is "broken" and needs to be "fixed." That's hardly what I consider offensive language. I have trouble believing that the devs are as overly sensitive to criticism as you're portraying them to be.

And as far as Norfleet goes, I'm sure his success has played a big role in creating this controversy around the VQ. And I'm sure his success has a lot more to do with him than it does with the VQ. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the VQ is perfect the way it is. And it doesn't necessarily mean there's anything wrong with Norfleet, either. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I think its not even that simple. The fact that she one of the most powerful choices, maybe even THE most powerful, is easy to admit to. Especially for certain nations and certain playing styles. But whether thats over-powered is different. If the lowest is always nerfed upwards, and the highest always nerfed downwards, then we will end up playing chess.

To be truthful Ive only found VQ to be fun to play with a couple of nations. I know fun-to-play isnt the deciding factor in some peoples games, especially multiplayer, but it means that for me the game isnt broke by her. Im still looking at it though.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I think its not even that simple. The fact that she one of the most powerful choices, maybe even THE most powerful, is easy to admit to. Especially for certain nations and certain playing styles. But whether thats over-powered is different. If the lowest is always nerfed upwards, and the highest always nerfed downwards, then we will end up playing chess.

To be truthful Ive only found VQ to be fun to play with a couple of nations. I know fun-to-play isnt the deciding factor in some peoples games, especially multiplayer, but it means that for me the game isnt broke by her. Im still looking at it though. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Nah, of course stength of VQs has nothing to do with Norfleet. I've only played against him few times, and I've played against dozens of VQ in other games, many of them were using simialar design. However obviously because it is so strong and fits his standard strategy Norfleet does use it most of the time, based upon what other players tell me.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Preach on brother Wikd. Yes they should do what you want shouldn't they, seeing how they never play the game themselves, nor can have any valid opinions concerning balance of their own, especially since all PLAYERS agree on these balance issues. You also make an excellent point that you shouldn't mince words or be polite, behaving like a snotnosed brat underscores how strongly you feel and should serve to make people take you and your opinions seriously.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Even if i only see the fun factor in a mp game (fun its great for me too) i'm bored to see so much VQs. I want some diversity! This can only be reached by balance. Rabelais is like lot of here a very good analyst and sees the advantages in the multifunctional VP-chassis. He shoudn't be blamed for that.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">His isnt so bad. Not as bad as some.

Its more the total impression Im feeling. But you are probably right. It shouldnt matter how things are worded. Im sure any programmer would be willing to go back and look at something no matter how its referred to them. I dont think I would and I havent put nearly as much work in the stuff I program. But Im probably just a cranky "old guy" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ May 06, 2004, 21:18: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">There's a difference between being bored because everyone is using something they think is uber, and that thing actually being uber.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Even if i only see the fun factor in a mp game (fun its great for me too) i'm bored to see so much VQs. I want some diversity! This can only be reached by balance. Rabelais is like lot of here a very good analyst and sees the advantages in the multifunctional VP-chassis. He shoudn't be blamed for that. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Your right, he shouldnt. We need testers who can find such things. And we should ask the devs to look into it. And even make some suggestions on how it might be balanced abit. Im all for it.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

Well, the ultimate question about VQs is this:

Do VQs, independently of their players, win games? Does choosing the VQ mean you are far more likely to win against anyone who does NOT choose one, independently of how good you are, or how good he is? If so, then VQs would definitely be unbalanced.

I don't think this is actually the case, however. The opinions of noted beta testers like Zen and Jasper support this.

Now, we consider diversity: Why are there so many VQs in the game....and why does it continue even though ultimately, these aspiring VQs are inevitably laid to burnination by somebody else?

The answer seems fairly simple: As the VQ is generally used as an SC chassis, it tends to be the most visible symbol of asskicking. When a VQ destroys your army, you think "Wow. Those things are mean." They're also available to many nations(vampires being a legend in many different cultures). As such, it is very easy to reach for the thing which Last handed your *** to you.

As a result, the vast majority of VQs are not, in fact, being operated because the player in question has evaluated its individual merits and drawbacks in relation to the strategy he wants to play, but because he saw it/heard about it, and thought it was cool.

Unfortunately, this is an entirely illusory, and unavoidable, effect. People are inherently drawn to stories of success and wish to emulate it: Witness the evolution of cookie-cutter character building in RPGs: Regardless of whether it's the character that's right for the player's strategy, people want these cookie-cutter formulas, perhaps because they are new and know no better.

I've heard of this myself: People, who have no idea what they really want, will take this high-priced chassis, and proceed to do something completely useless with it, like turning it into an artillery caster. Why did they even *PICK* a VQ for that? You certainly can't get a terribly good blessing with one, so it's not a good choice if you wanted to play a 9-bless.

I chalk this up entirely to imitation, particularly of something people have heard of or observed first hand. If somebody's playing a water blessing, or a fire blessing, a player isn't likely going to see this in action directly, because the pretender is not an in-your-face item. If your army gets wiped out by a VQ, though....you're going to see it unfold. You're going to think, "Wow." (or something less complimentary). If you're a newbie and don't know any better, you're going to think, "I want one of those."

Nevermind that it may not be suitable for your strategy. If anything, I expect that VQ usage will actually taper off as newbies mature into veterans and find their own niche. However, newbies will newbies.

[ May 06, 2004, 21:36: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">"Everyone" is using her because she is (far) the best SC in game in moment. Immortal, flying (fast) and stealthy.

She is good at the start of a game, because she can fight armies alone without fearing dead. She stops invading armies more or less easily in own dominion. If she fear an attack she just use 'hide' to prevent any (even teleport) battles. In lategame power and magic power - wish boost counts double and more for an immortal character (this can be a wished VQ too). Its better to invest in immortals then in others. Some more points are her ethereality, good resistants, regeneration, free vampires and her complete armable body. She is the chasis with most combinations of good attributes.

[ May 06, 2004, 23:41: Message edited by: calmon ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Nah, these all are totally irrelivent questions. The only question that need to be asked, is if VQ significantly more powerfull SC than other pretenders in MP games? If yes, than perhaps it should be toned down a little (but IMHO not too much, the concept of VQ is cool http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif ). If not, than it should be left alone. The considerations "If VQ enough to win the game by itself, blah-blah-blah" are obviously irrelivent to the issue of balance.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

Just gotta say it: This whole arguement seems so ridiculous. I mean, why would we need to submit success data to determine if the VQ is actually overpowered? I mean, just look at it, and compare it to any other same-priced pretender. Even ones that cost more dont compare (father of serpents, for example.) And you can't forget the free vampires, which is one of my favorite things about the VQ when I play it (I find them very useful as a rearstrike force, once there are 20+ of them.. especially against AI. Ethereal + Immortal = fun)

I saw it right away, my first game of Dom ii was Abysia with a VQ. I can't imagine that there are people that actually think it is balanced, although fun to play, I admit.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

Now that was a good reply Norfolk. ( must say I don't like the title of this topic)

if I understands you correct
The Vampire Queens "power" lays in the easyness she is turned into a cockie cutter pretender!

you could be right ( i am not experienced enough to say). But I still see a problem with her then.

She is to much of a challange for a newbie to counter! (though some answers finally does shows up).

this Cockie cutter might be unavoidble, but certainly not fortunate! The Vampire Queen is a newbie basher. And as a newbie I am ready to take my beatings and learn this game, but I don't look forward to get beaten by a cookie cutter!

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">But why does a Super Combat god have to be nerfed? This isnt Immortal Kombat. Does that mean that the super rainbow is next? or the best god for harassment? support? defense?

No one is doubting that she is high in the combat god Category but will lowering her help? And we seem to still be seeing more agreement on her faults then suggestions on what to do. What changes wont put the Ghost King next on the list? As a combat god you cant make her equal to Wyrm or Nataraja

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

The sad part is the players don't even agree on what 'over-powered' means.

Some people think over-powered means she is above the power average.

Some people think that if she isn't invincible, she isn't over-powered.

No-one wants to use each others language so everyone goes in circles, repeating themselves. Perhaps people need to agree on definitions before they do anything.

- Kel

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Not merely a "cookie cutter pretender", but the ease with which she can be built into a number of SCs. Is this a BAD thing, though? After all, the VQ is useful really, for just that one thing. Her innate magics are not conducive towards any kind of a bless effect that is of much use: neither the death nor blood blessings are of much use in general, and focussing on either death or blood will more or less gut her ability as an SC. Trying to turn her into a truly potent SC is so expensive in points, that even playing strong dominion with scales is really not a sound plan with her. If you it half-assed, the VQ isn't really an impressive fighter at all.

So you can turn the VQ into one really useful thing only: A squasher of regular armies (and newbies). Of course, the ability to squash newbies is a meaningless trick: Newbies, are, by definition, bad at the game, and trying to balance the game for people who are BAD at it, rather than concentrating on what SKILLED play looks like, is a recipe for a boring game with no depth.

So in the end, at great cost in nation points, the VQ can be turned into a single, highly potent SC, that is not, by any means, even close to unstoppable, as a wide variety of easily available countermeasures exist. Is that really such a problem?

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

I played a game with some new players and I used the Lord of the Hunt with Carrion Woods Pangaea. I used the LH to walk all over their territorys dropping maenads. It wrecked havok with their plans for quite awhile until they sunk enough into defense in every province to stop the maenad attacks. By then I had Black Heart and turned him into a godly assassin so they had to crank the defense to over 20 in every province to try and catch me sneaking. By then the carrion army ruled the world.

I dont want to see Lord of the Hunt be the next target.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

Hey, that's pretty funny. I like that. Neat trick. Of course, the advantage the Lord of the Wild has is that he's Pangaea-only, so people can't try to port the strategy to other nations: As a result, you won't see a deluge of Lord of the Wilds from wannabes.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I missed my plane http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Um, did you *read* my post? I haven't seen your name before.

My manners are fine, thank you.

I haven't demanded anything of anyone.

I've expressed an opinion, and then, having been chastised, I expressed an opinion about others opinion about the opinion... etc (pant, pant, pant... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

I have he greatest respect for Gandalf, the mods generally, and certainly the devs. If there's somewhere that isn't readily apparent in my scribbling, ... please show me where I misrepresented the care and affection I have for this forum.

If anyone is getting attacked here, (which I doubt) it's arguably me. Is it just the grotesque effrontery of having thought about the game, tried to express those thoughts clearly on a point of ongoing controversy, and expecting people to respond constructively in an open forum about said game?

To quote the Funniest White Man in America (Circa 1978)

Well Excuuuuuuuuuuuuse Me! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif


Rabe the Non-Airborne.

[ May 07, 2004, 02:51: Message edited by: rabelais ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

It appeared that Johan O thought the same thing that the 'unknown' presented Rabe, or did you casually ignore that. What may not be offensive or said in a way which is an affront to you, because you are the one making the claims, may sound very much like it to at least one other person. A not-uncommon communication problem, though whether it was intended or not is probably your main concern.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">"Everyone" is using her because she is (far) the best SC in game in moment. Immortal, flying (fast) and stealthy.

She is good at the start of a game, because she can fight armies alone without fearing dead. She stops invading armies more or less easily in own dominion. If she fear an attack she just use 'hide' to prevent any (even teleport) battles. In lategame power and magic power - wish boost counts double and more for an immortal character (this can be a wished VQ too). Its better to invest in immortals then in others. Some more points are her ethereality, good resistants, regeneration, free vampires and her complete armable body. She is the chasis with most combinations of good attributes. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yep, it's the immortality, imo. In a recent game (still in the early stages, actually), on turn 3 I lost my Pretender - one of the 2 I think is possibly superior to the VQ. Not the Allfather - the Carrion Dragon. A beefy, Carrion Woods Carrion Dragon, which I have ... some moderate experience with. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

It wasn't a screwup; it wasn't stupidity, it wasn't even a catastrophic random event. Nope - I attacked a province with militia and light infantry, not even an obscence quantity thereof.

By fluke chance - a Water-2 mage was in command. Frozen Carrion Dragons aren't much fun. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

With a VQ (who could, and probably would, also have been sent to conquer a militia / LI province), no big deal. She's back in the capitol next door.

My Carrion Dragon? Well, turn 3, Carrion Woods doesn't have many priests. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif So it took a while to call him back, during which time there's no asskicking and conquering going on, because all the carrion lords / ladies / centaurs / squirrels I can conjure are used for calling him back; ditto black dryads.

And when he comes back, 5 or 6 turns later, of course he's lost a level of ability in 5 different magic paths. 101 Damnations! If only I'd had a VQ instead, I wouldn't have wasted 5 magic paths, 5 turns of no conquest and bad recruiting.

The VQ allows quick early conquest, if set up right. It allows good mid-game conquest. And it kicks arse in the late game, with proper equipment. Equipment which can be replaced far more cheaply and quickly than doing 4 or 5 empowerments.

It's not Norfleet - he wins because he's a good player. But the VQ has _NO_ weaknesses, not even fire (which it should), and immortality that also heals wounds, which it shouldn't (except for the Phoenix probably, only at rebirth.)

Mind you - I still think the CD is better overall than the VQ, certainly when it gets pumped up via Carrion Woods vice base / NE. But you'll never see 16 Carrion Dragons in one game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">His isnt so bad. Not as bad as some.

Its more the total impression Im feeling. But you are probably right. It shouldnt matter how things are worded. Im sure any programmer would be willing to go back and look at something no matter how its referred to them. I dont think I would and I havent put nearly as much work in the stuff I program. But Im probably just a cranky "old guy" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I've been a programmer for a really long time. And sorry, but imo being told something is "broken" is pretty polite, cordial, and reasonable. Being told that something is "****ed" isn't uncommon, in my experience, and even there, I personally didn't take offense. It was ****ed - but, for instance, in one instance the fault lay in Sun's libraries, but try convincing a user of that when their program crashes. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

What phrasing do you think people should use? "Excuse me, I don't think the VQ is as wonderful and perfect and cuddly as it could be?" (Or, "The only way this program could be any more supercalifragilistic would be if it didn't crash and lose half an hour or an hours work when I mouse clicked a seeminly stuck menu 10 times in 5 seconds."?)

[ May 07, 2004, 05:58: Message edited by: Zen ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Why not? From the flavor text, it sure sounds like the VQ is supposed to be a caster, not a combat god anyway. The VQ is pretty much the only SC with immortality. I suppose you could supercharge a bog mummy, but again, only with one race.

If the VQ was an Ulm-specific god we wouldn't be having this conversation. If the Allfather (or carrion dragon) were universal, I'm sure there would be raging discussions on thier strengths as well... but seeing as how neither is immortal I still doubt this to be the case.

All VQ defenders: please submit a list of reasons why the Cyclops, Titan, Shedu, Lord of the Desert Sun, Lord of the Gates, Son of the Sea, Lord of the Wild, or Lord of the Night are superior to the Vampire Queen. Please stop with the "She's not overpowered" arguments and explain why all these 125-150 point chassis are superior. When you are done explaining this, perhaps I will concede ground. All these chassis are not broken. She is broken.

In case you are keeping score, none of the above are immortal. Only two fly. None are erthreal. None of them have two seperate resistances. Neither of those with resistances also fly. None of them have more item slots than the VQ. Quite a few have less.

Do you grasp the concept that she's a 110 point pretender and thus should not be superior? Why is this so difficult to understand? Do you not think the VQ is one of the top 5 chassis in the game? Why then does she not cost as much as the top 5? Why is she only 110 points?

You VQ defenders have conveniently avoided this issue. Please, for the Last time. Answer this question or concede defeat. She is clearly overpowered. Your inability to either recognize this or admit as such is beyond belief.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I don't get it. Wouldn't 1 PD be sufficient since the maenads would autorout?

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The Lord of the Desert Sun and Lord of the Gates are horribly broken right now, due to their counterproductive autosummons that will quickly die and cause a rout. They're not really a good measure of performance and should probably be greatly reduced in cost, or this annoyance fixed, as this renders them nearly worthless as SCs. However, the LotDS *DOES* have a Fire-2 and Nature-1 base, which can make him a good choice for building towards a fire and nature bless. The fact that the lions are groundpounders also means his morale isn't QUITE as shabby as the Moloch's. If this silliness were fixed, the LotDS would make a respectable warrior.

The Shedu is, admittedly, somewhat of a dullard. He is very strong, and he tramples, which can be viewed as both a strength and weakness. However, the weakness of the Shedu, in my opinion, is irrelevant to the matter: Plenty of chassis options are unattractive. The problem lies with their being overpriced, not with everything else.

The Lord of the Gates is also a 50 point chassis. By your admittedly flawed comparison criteria, it should be inferior on those grounds alone. You'd be better off comparing the Lord of the Gates to the Prince of Death, who is definitely superior for the same cost....does this mean that it's the Prince of Death who is broken, since he outclasses a chassis that is intended to fill the same niche, or the Lord of the Gates that is broken, because he sucks for the above reasons, plus his useless shades give him the indomitable battle morale of the Moloch?

The Titan and Cyclops both possess superior physical stats, which Illwinter seems to price at a premium in a pretender chassis. Both are very physically strong, and the Cyclops has an excellent 20 base protection(23 with his basic E3). The Titan also has a base dominion of 3, as opposed to the VQ's 2...and as a VQ would definitely be better under high dominion, you're going to have to shell out extra for this privilege.

Both also possess level 3 magics, which give them a leg-up on a useful blessing effect, Air and Earth respectively. Both of these are potentially very useful blessings. In addition to their ability to provide an affordable and useful L9 blessing, which the VQ lacks, they're also capable of fighting....but this is not their primary function! The fact that they can provide a bless effect, IN ADDITION to their raw physical might, is why they're priced so. Remember: Buying your VQ magic paths for battle only makes her more potent. It won't do an especially good job filling national magics. It won't give the rest of your nation any useful benefits. It is not an appropriate strategy for all nations.

The Lord of the Night is physically powerful as the above, AND he flies, AND he is an assassin. Full slots, too. He's accompanied in battle by fiends of darkness, and while this opens up that annoying rout weakness, fiends of darkness are formidable....especially in assassinations!

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Because a VQ, chassis alone, is crap. Try it. just take an empty VQ chassis and pit it in mortal combat against a basic Titan chassis. Script them to the best of your ability.

Guess what? The Titan will hand the VQ her ***. Why? Because the Titan is physically stronger, his magic is more useful, and he can crush the VQ in one hit. It's only when the VQ has been loaded down with some *300-500* points in magic paths specifically for the purpose of battle that she becomes useful. This is a far larger investment than a basic Titan and cannot be considered a fair comparison.

You cannot assess the quality of a pretender based purely on its chassis cost. It is simply untrue that a pretender with a 125 point chassis must be superior in every way to a pretender with a 50 point chassis. The chassis is not everything. You also have to consider the magic, the scales, and the dominion, and how that affects the functionality of the nation.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I believe I have just addressed your points now.

Yes, the VQ can be tweaked into a generally more effective SC, particularly against normal troops. However, she has other weaknesses that the other pretenders may lack, and pure ability as an SC is not the only barometer of performance. If it weren't for the VQ's ability to fight, she would be rather useless, since she does not offer anything else to play off of: Any chassis can play scales, and you'd be better off with a low-cost purely physical chassis, like a no-magic Wyrm, which gains immortality through expendability. A bless, on the other hand, requires a good toe-hold start into that magic path, or it will grow hideously expensive. A fire-9 Vampire Queen impresses nobody, as the ruinous cost of trying to shoehorn a blessing onto something which has no leverage in that department, combined with the fact that you have essentially pissed away the strengths of the chassis by trying to make it do something it is bad at, will not give you a winning strategy.

The Vampire Queen is not in all ways superior to the Titan, or the Cyclops, or any other decent chassis: These chassis can give you things that the VQ cannot: Scales, blessings, or cheaper access to missing magics. The VQ, on the other hand, offers the potential to tweak into a monstrous SC....but only if you are willing to pay the price, which is *NOT* 110 points: You need magic paths suitable for casting your buffs, none of which comes natively on the VQ.....so you sacrifice a scale just to start it. You need strong dominion, for immortality is worthless if you can't even keep your dominion. All these costs add up to far more than just the 110 point chassis, something you are blissfully ignoring. And finally, the VQ needs research to HAVE spells to cast. A physically mighty chassis like the Bull, or the Wyrm, or, best of all, the Carrion Dragon, can start kicking *** from turn 1 or 2.

Bottom line: Yes, the VQ has the potential to be a better SC, but is not, by default: accessories sold seperately, batteries not included. Yes, the VQ is better for some strategies. No, the VQ is not better for ALL strategies. No, the strategies which utilize the VQ are not inherently superior to the alternatives. No, the VQ is not suitable for all nations.

If the VQ were the end all, be all, Marignon, R'lyeh, and Atlantis, which cannot choose the VQ, would be considered the worst nations in the game. Yet it's Tien Chi, despite the fact that it has a VQ, which is popularly considered to be first against the wall when the Revolution comes.

Sure, the VQ is currently a popular item....but how many people, really, are making it WORK for them...and how many people are just being ingloriously smitten in spite of their VQ? If you believe the VQ is a magic bullet, you're welcome to take one, and dance with some experienced players. See how well she actually does. Don't just whomp newbies, then complain how powerful it was....against players who don't know how to play.

[ May 07, 2004, 07:00: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">So are you going to ignore the Natarajah, Carrion Dragon, All-Father, Ghost King, Prince of Death, Neried, Dagon, Saurolich, Son of Niefel, Void Lord?

All of these Chassis can be designed and equipped that will kill a VQ and have plenty of room to spare. Not to mention the ones you already mentioned.

How? Take 380 of your points, and put them into them where you'd like, research what you'd like and equip them both. Then have them fight.

Not to mention that each one can expand just as easily as a VQ. Hell, even a 9F Dragon can expand from Turn2 on. You just have to know what you are doing.

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Sure. But if you know what you doing and want to play a battlecharacter the VQ is in most cases simple the best choice.

She just needs some modification like higher cost for additional magic path and maybe losing 1 of her skills and she is ballanced.

[ May 07, 2004, 08:16: Message edited by: calmon ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Because the game isn't won just by having a pretender who can kill in 1 place at 1 time. I know what I'm doing and in most cases the VQ is not the best choice. Why? Because she is only one unit that slowly can breed lesser units. Very decent; yes, but hardly a game winner. The game is won on many different levels, not the least of which is initial expansion, correct use of SC's, multiple strategies, suprise, preemptive strikes, diplomacy, backstabbing, overcompensation, luck, initial postition and many other factors, player morale (this is where the futility of fighting a VQ is won, for those who can't get past it). It's not just building one badass unit, your initial Design points dictate how you are going to play your game and if you sink them all into one slivered aspect, you can be beaten on 4 others.

If someone could just build a VQ and win the game, then they would do so and noone would win who didn't have a VQ. Unfortunately, you can build a VQ and lose the game far more often than you can win it.

[ May 07, 2004, 08:20: Message edited by: Zen ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Thats not the point! The world isn't black and white. VQ makes your chances just a little better then other pretenders.

Be sure. I'm not a player who doesn't know how to handle VQ in combat. I only want a little (each little count) more ballanced game.

[ May 07, 2004, 08:21: Message edited by: calmon ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">So anyone who wins with a Blessing Strategy wins because they made one with a VQ? Anyone who won a game based without a VQ did it on a 'longshot'?

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">So anyone who wins with a Blessing Strategy wins because they made one with a VQ? Anyone who won a game based without a VQ did it on a 'longshot'? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">lol. that doesn't follow in the least. you don't happen to be working for Wolfowitz and Feith are you?

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

seriously, what sort of defintion of balance are you working from?

[ May 07, 2004, 08:33: Message edited by: archaeolept ]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It follows exactly. How about we take a direct; from Combat Pretender, to Combat Pretender stance.

Anyone who has played a Combat Oriented Earth 3 Natarajah who has miraculously (I know it's a stretch) won when playing in a game with a VQ, is a longshot? That VQ should have given that player the edge to win under any circumstances? Or at the very least against a less point intensive design on a comprable chassis?

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

Norfleet has just made what I reckon to be the first sound and convincing arguement against the VQ being overpowered.

Given that I had become slightly irritated with constant defenses of "It's not overpowered you are all Newbies" and "It's not overpowered, there are counters" this is no mean feat http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

The arguement: That an SC VQ is not just 110 points. It is closer to 400 or 500 points.

This doesn't mean the VQ is not overpowered, but it is a good answer to the "but she only costs 110 points" arguements.

Norfleet: If you were playing against an evil twin, who would destroy the world and everything you hold dear if he beat you, and you KNEW he would play the temple/castling strategy, how would you play to beat him?

(of course, you don't have to answer, as presumably doing so would mean many people reading this could counter your favourite strategy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif )

(finally as an aside "Illwinter places a high value on X" is entirely irrelevant if we are talking about balance. If Illwinter decided immortal chassis should be free, to represent the fact they have less far to go to become true gods that would not mean free immortal chassis would be balanced)

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The one that doesn't invoke Popularity as it's primary reasoning.

But here's a definition for you:

bal·ance ( P ) Pronunciation Key (blns)
n.

1. A weighing device, especially one consisting of a rigid beam horizontally suspended by a low-friction support at its center, with identical weighing pans hung at either end, one of which holds an unknown weight while the effective weight in the other is increased by known amounts until the beam is level and motionless.
2. A state of equilibrium or parity characterized by cancellation of all forces by equal opposing forces.
3. The power or means to decide.
4.
1. A state of bodily equilibrium: thrown off balance by a gust of wind.
2. The ability to maintain bodily equilibrium: Gymnasts must have good balance.
5. A stable mental or psychological state; emotional stability.
6. A harmonious or satisfying arrangement or proportion of parts or elements, as in a design. See Synonyms at proportion.
7. An influence or force tending to produce equilibrium; counterpoise.
8. The difference in magnitude between opposing forces or influences.
9. Accounting.
1. Equality of totals in the debit and credit sides of an account.
2. The difference between such totals, either on the credit or the debit side.
10. Something that is left over; a remainder.
11. Chemistry. Equality of mass and net electric charge of reacting species on each side of an equation.
12. Mathematics. Equality with respect to the net number of reduced symbolic quantities on each side of an equation.
13. A balance wheel.

[Middle English balaunce, from Old French, from Vulgar Latin *bilancia, having two scale pans, from Latin bilnx : bi-, two; see dwo- in Indo-European Roots + lnx, scale.]
[Download or Buy Now]
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Here is also Proportional for you, if you haven't taken a gander:

pro·por·tion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pr-pôrshn, -pr-)
n.

1. A part considered in relation to the whole.
2. A relationship between things or parts of things with respect to comparative magnitude, quantity, or degree: the proper proportion between oil and vinegar in the dressing.
3. A relationship between quantities such that if one varies then another varies in a manner dependent on the first: “We do not always find visible happiness in proportion to visible virtue” (Samuel Johnson).
4. Agreeable or harmonious relation of parts within a whole; balance or symmetry.
5. Dimensions; size. Often used in the plural.
6. Mathematics. A statement of equality between two ratios. Four quantities, a, b, c, d, are said to be in proportion if a/b = c/d.


tr.v. pro·por·tioned, pro·por·tion·ing, pro·por·tions

1. To adjust so that proper relations between parts are attained.
2. To form the parts of with balance or symmetry.


[Middle English proporcion, from Old French proportion, from Latin prporti, prportin-, from pr portine, according to (each) part : pr, according to; see pro-1 + portine, ablative of porti, part; see per-2 in Indo-European Roots.]

Re: Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I don't give the VQ a importance like that.

Please understand. I like just a little modifications to her.

...and i'm bored to see Hall of Fames like that:


Name.........Nation........Kills........Exp
Lysindia.....Caelum..........233.........65
Evelyn.......Mictlan.........199.........45
Francisca....Abysia..........178.........46
Lady Dark....Emor............150.........42
Buffy........Man.............102.........40


I do more like the game when people chose different characters and they are more or less balanced (not euqal!)

[ May 07, 2004, 08:41: Message edited by: calmon ]