Random Picks and Modding...
 

I doubt many of you remember me, but those that do might remember my rather silly passion for 'brute-forcing' certain things.

Well, I am currently trying to work out accurate gold costs for random picks on mages, using Illwinter's baseline as given on their website. I have discovered a rather unusual event.

It needs tweaking, but a general rule of thumb is that a fully random pick is worth 25g regardless of the mage's fixed picks. Elemental or Sorcery random picks are harder to quantify (at least, on mages that have both), but I hope to have those quantified soon.

Now, a few caveats regarding this. It assumes that the random pick is fully random; i.e., it can be any of the 8 paths, and it is not bound to any other random pick (such as in the case of Atlantis's Kings of the Deep). It also assumes that each of the 8 paths of magic are equally desirable. That is, Fire magic is no better than Air magic is no better than Death magic is no better than Astral magic. This is Illwinter's assumption on their site, and I have followed it.

What prompted this is the at-times rather obtuse pricing of mages in the game. Certain mages are drastically undercosted (High Seraphs, Circle Masters, Daughters of Avalon), while others are drastically overcosted (Master of the Five Elements, Pans). I hope the end result of my research will be a balance mod to redress this.

Something else that I hope to glean is the 'formula' for calculating the cost of commanders, beyond the very simple. I feel that I have a basic grasp of it, but the quantification of various 'specials' needs to be tightened.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. I will check when I can.

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

Hey, this looks very nice! -- but one word of warning, if I may: With a few exceptions (most notably: The Arch Seraph, who really could be a lot more expensive in my book), the over- and under-pricednicess of mages is not something which needs much, if any, fixing, because it is itself the result of balancing. "Balancing" the mage prices without drastically changing the rest of the nations -- in essence, creating a whole new game -- would make for disaster.

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

Illwinter has stated, that non-standardly priced mages are priced cheaper/more expensive on purpose. However, I still think your balance mod will help by adding an option to those who don't like the current pricing.

I don't remember your name, but I remember some of your threads and ideas... I was going to link your old thread about Exalted mod and the pricing of random magics that followed from it, until I noticed who started it all... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Welcome back!

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

Sorry, but I think that this is futile: All these pricing rules can only be rules of thumb, to ensure that user-made mods are not too unbalanced!

It would be boring if all nations would be equal, hence e.g. Caelum is defined by its cheap mages as Ulm is defined by its superior Infantry. Once these basic difference have been decided, gaming balance is then an entirely different issue. Since Caelum has cheaper mages, other nations should have other advantager or caelum should have another disadvantage, but that is an entirely different topic for a different thread.

So establishing a rough gold cost estimate is useful for modders who do not have the experience and the a lot of test-gaming-time, but still want to add new thins to the existing game (assuming it is balanced). So apart from that, what is the point then?

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

I am aware that non-standard mages are supposedly there for 'balance purposes'... but having played the game for some time, I have to question this. Let's take for example the most likely culprit, the High Seraph of Caelum.

It is RIDICULOUSLY under-priced. As I recall, it is 3A2W1?, correct? By my calculations, the price for its magic ALONE is 257.75g. Then add the base price of 30g for a commander (though I'm working on refining that), and you get 287.75. Then, let's take into account that it flies, and is cold-immune. Say another 20. That's 300g.

Caelum gets this for 175g, instead.

Well, then, I would expect to see outstandingly bad troops for Caelum (ignoring, for the present, the fact that magic always outstrips troops). Well, they're certainly fragile, for the most part. However, that is to balance that nearly all of their troops fly, and naturally have magic weapons. What non-flying troops they have are quite good, so I don't see how Caelum's 'good mages' are balanced by their 'bad troops'.

Well, what about their priests? Maybe they just have no good priests? Nope. Their only priest(ess), the Seraphine, is Holy-3 AND Stealthy. No, you really can't say they have bad priests in the least.

Well, what about bad scales? Are they balanced there? You look, and no. Far from it, in fact. They want Cold-3, which is another way of saying that they get 120 free points. Now, even if 80, say, of those points go into upping their Pretender's Dominion so that they naturally spend time in their Dominion, that's still more points than the average nation gets, and that's a higher Dominion. As it is, Cold is better than Heat because most Undead/Underwater nations take it, so it's more likely to be a Cold world than a Hot one.

So, personally, I don't see where Caelum is all that hampered by other factors that they deserve to have a mage on the order of the High Seraph, that cheaply.

For myself, I do not think that the ideas espoused for balance should work that well. Balance each part of the game against themselves, and you end with a balanced game. Balance does NOT mean equal, though. Ulm has good troops, yes... except against Undead/Magic/Giants/Armor-Piercing attacks, etc. Ulm also has a good mage, if a limited one. (The Master Smith, by ANY calculation, is undercosted.)

In any event, if/when I release a mod for the mages in the game, people who don't feel there's an imbalance in the mages don't have to use it.

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

I have finished my analysis of random picks. The 'general rule' of 25g per pure random pick is rather borne out. It gets higher with more paths, and it seems to dip on the second random pick, but it's rather set, otherwise.

I will start working on an analysis of the commanders in the game, to see if I can 'pin down' at least some of the variables involved in it. Any suggestions as to how to do this would be appreciated.

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

Commander factors, in order of importance to me:

Free Summons (e.g. Unholy / Tribal King / Wolfherd)
Magic Command
Undead Command
Amphibious
Command
Flight
Stealth
Sailing
Immunities
Protection
Has a Shield
Strat Move over 2
Survival Skills (forest, waste, etc)
Longranged Weapon (eg composite bow)
HP
Precision
Magic Resist
Other assorted bonuses (Standard, Patrol, Pillage, NNE, etc)

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

Ah, Saber Cherry. Greetings again. If I may comment...?

Well, Unholy already has its calculation done for me (Illwinter). Personally, I think it's about right. Unholy-3 Priests can put out a lot of Longdead, but they pay 150g for the privilege.

Tribal Kings and Wolfherds, OTOH, show that just being able to produce chaff isn't all that expensive an ability.

Granted, this is important. I imagine it will be valued at twice the equivalent amount of 'normal' leadership. This of course does not include Leadership (of any type) gained by magic, since that (presumably) is included in the cost of the magic path.

Again, useful. On this note, how much do you think Strategic Movement should be valued?


Leadership is referred to above.

Sailing is a movement enhancer and as such will be valued. Stealth... not so much. I'll explain more below.

Do you think that all immunities should be equally valued?

Unless someone can tell me otherwise, Weapons and Armor will be ignored in this analysis. The reason being is that is taken into account on resources, correct? Base (inherent) Protection values will be valued accordingly.

As a base, I am looking at the basic scout. All of its stats are 10, it has no Leadership, it has Stealth(+0), and that's about it. That would lead me to believe the following:

Commander: 10
Stats: 0
Leadership: 0
Stealth(+0): 10

For a grand total of 20 points.

Now, if you 'move up' to the standard infantry commander, he loses stealth, but gains Leadership 25. This might look like the following:

Commander: 10
Stats: 0
Leadership: 20
For a total of 30 points.

From these examples, you might be able to look at the following, for base leadership:

0 - 0 points
10 - 10 points
25 - 20 points
50 - 30 points
75 - 40 points
125 (Is 100 a valid base number?) - 50 points

Does this work out to about the right amount? I don't know yet. But it's my 'working guess'. As for stats, I'm going to assign positive/negative numbers based on most stats' deviation from 10 (Str, Att, Def, Prc, Mrl, MR). Protection will simply be its number. Encumbrance on its deviation from 3 (that seems to be the human norm), with probably a larger 'bonus' if it's 0. For HPs, currently it's just like Str, but it may need to be changed. Do you think that might work, or would it be overvaluing HPs?

I'll do some more work on it, and see what I can come up with.

Thanks for the feedback.

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

Interesting. I was not considering a scout to be a commander, since they have zero leadership. The points I included above were just things I consider important in recruiting leaders that will be leading my troops.

I know protection and shields are accounted for by resource cost, but shields are so critical that I would never recruit a commander with low protection and no shield at any resource cost unless it had special abilities (like magic paths) or was dirt cheap. Commanders without shields and armor die like flies when exposed to arrows... seeking arrows... blade winds... flying shards... well, anything, really.

Undead leadership can probably be valued similarly to or a bit more than normal leadership, since normal undeads are much weaker than humans, and devils are much stronger than humans.

Magical leadership, OTOH, I think is far more valuable per unit than normal leadership, not just double.

However, it is very rare to have a gold cost for commanders with undead or magical leadership that is not already paid for with their magic paths, so these points may be moot.

HPs on commanders (the kind that sit at the back of the army in battles, and just lead troops) are much more important than other stats (except protection and maybe MR). HP protects them from seeking arrows, strategic province-blasting spells, projectiles, and damage from auras of friendly units... which are the leading causes of commander death, in my experience. The other stats are usually useless except versus assassination attempts, weak fliers set to "attack rear", and very powerful commanders that you actually use in combat.

When evaluating commanders, it may be useful to have a scale for "pure commanders" in which stats (except hp,mr, and prot) are generally irrelevant, and a scale for "combat commanders" that are intended to actually fight, where all stats are valuable. After all... would anyone pay more for an indy commander that had +2 str, -1 enc, and +2 ap? I wouldn't... but if I had a choice between an indy commander with +5 HP or +5 str, I would certainly choose +5 HP. Precision is always worthless unless it is above 10 or on a leader that comes with a ranged weapon (or magic). Also...

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
0 - 0 points
10 - 10 points
25 - 20 points
50 - 30 points
75 - 40 points</pre><hr />

I seem to be more in favor of big armies than other people, but I find 50-leadership to be way better than 25-leadership, and 10-leadership to be virtually worthless. I'd probably scale it more like...

0 - 0 points
10 - 8 points
25 - 20 points
50 - 35 points
75 - 45 points

...but it depends on the way you like to design armies and what kind of units you use. Mictlan leadership isn't really as valuable as Jotun or Abysian leadership.

As far as strat moves go, all commanders have a minimum of 2 strat moves as far as I know. More strat moves are almost never useful UNLESS they are combined with flight, terrain survival, AND access to units with flight, terrain survival, and high strat moves. Strat moves are useless underwater. In fact, strat moves may be worthless for normal commanders, and only important for Caelian and combat commanders.

Immunities: They're all very valuable, and more so as the game goes on. Poison is probably the least valuable. The value of immunities increases drastically with the power of the unit, so that inherent fire immunity on a supercombattant is way more valuable than inherent fire immunity on an Abysian commander. Maybe you should make immunities multiplicative rather than additive. For example, Frost immunity could be worth 1.5x, making a Neifel Jarl worth (300 points)*1.5 and a Caelian scout worth (20 points)*1.5 or something like that.

Well, anyway, these are just some random thoughts I tapped in as I was considering commanders, but feel free to ignore them and value units however you want http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

*nods* Understood. However, I am trying for an 'across-the-board' approach to Leader design, and the Scout is the simplest in terms of number of variables free.

Again, understood, and I'll look into it, but it's not something I'll be too concerned over. The hoped-for 'end result' of this analysis is to find out exactly where/why certain commanders have such high costs.

*nods* However, inherent leadership of either type is rare enough that double sounds about right. I mean... I can recall the other day I was playing Broken Empire Ermor, and I Prophetized my original Centurion... and he got Undead General for his heroic ability. That felt like a hat trick. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Rather. OTOH, it's most relevant to R'lyeh.

Ah. So, commanders like Pans and Triton Kings (which I feel are rather overpriced) should be more expensive simply because they have lots of HPs when compared to 'human' mage commanders?

I understand that, but commanders don't seem to be 'optimized' for that. I'd rather not go into 'generic commander', 'mage', and 'fighting commander'. It's basically subjective as to what, exactly, those are. Take a Vanherse. Is that a generic commander? (If he commands nothing but stealthy troops, maybe!) Is that a mage? (If he's spamming Phantasmal troops/False Horrors, maybe!) Is that a combat commander? (If he's decked out appropriately, maybe!) It's a judgement call, and one I hope to obviate.

Well, that's the tweaking stage. Re: Mictlan vs. Jotun, though... I'm trying to avoid that kind of nation vs. nation idea. OTOH, Mictlan NEEDS their Leadership. Abysia and Jotunheim can sort of 'get away' with lower Leadership ratings (because of their pound-for-pound better troops), but Mictlan needs to be able to mass troops.

However, that tends to be a wash. Mictlan spends more money for their commanders (due to higher Leadership ratings), but their units are dirt-cheap, both in gold and resources. Conversely, Jotunheim spends less money for their commanders (due to lower Leadership ratings), but their units are more expensive. This is the sort of balancing that is beyond the current scope of my analysis.

*nods* I was expecting to simply ignore it. Strategic move on the units themselves are much more valuable at the 2+ level, so I've noticed.

Mm, it's an idea, and I understand where you're coming from, but it does have its own uses. I mean, Abysian mages are completely immune to Fires from the Sky and similar spells, for example. I think I'll keep them all even, and see where it goes from there.

Heh. I ignore advice at my own peril, I think. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

Just a tiny little thing I wish to say, I think you should make all calculation by multiplying.
That is, for a fighting commander, 100 HP and 20 Attack will be much more valuable than two commanaders, one with 20 attack and one with 100 HP.
So the higher your stats, the better your other stats become, because with the improvement of one stat you increase the usability of the other (increasing HP to 100 as an example, will mean that that commander will live ~10 times more than an ordinary commander, thus making all of his abilities much more useful).

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

I strongly agree with Agrajag about multiplicitive values. The problem with that is weighing the various stats (not to mention abilities) and then normalizing them (to go from the product to the price). The additive math is definately easier, but it should be obvious that a mage assassin is worth more than an assassin and a mage.

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

On the other hand, why should a higher attack value make a fragile seraph (having a high cost by these calculations) even more expensive? I doubt that the attack value can be ever high enough to be of a use for most mages...

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

This would be a problem in the additive as well as the multiplicitive system which can easily be solved by applying "factors" for what is important for what each kind of unit (so you divide strength by 10 for a mage because it is almost completely useless for him, as an example).
The factors will be difficult to calculate though and increase the effort required by quite a bit (and or opposite to the original idea which was an absolute value for stats rather than one dependent on unit type.

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

I disagree, and for a number of reasons. First, on the 'mage assassin' &gt; 'mage' plus 'assassin'... why is that true? Yes, a mage assassin has more options than either a mage or an assassin (and thus should cost more), but if I have a mage and an assassin, and you have a mage assassin, you can only assassinate OR research/forge/ritualize/do magey stuff. I can do both (if not as well as the assassin mage).

For me, the 'opportunity cost' of having multiple commanders has to be worth something. (It's sort of an application of the chess idea of the 'overused piece'.)

Now, should they be equal? IOW, would the mage+assassin's cost equal the assassin mage's cost? Probably not. Even if the mage and the assassin mage had the same magic skills, and the assassin and the assassin mage had the same combat skills, the assassin mage most likely would not cost as much as the assassin and the mage combined, due to some overlap in other abilities. For example:

Assassin: 30g
Mage: 60g
Assassin/Mage: 80g

(These are 'off the top of my head', but the Void Child of R'lyeh, compared with a regular assassin or a 1-path mage, seems to bear this out.)

And yes, it's true that I can only buy one commander a turn, but look at the difference in upkeep should I buy one assassin and one mage, vs. two assassin/mages.

There are all kinds of permutations, but I don't see where a multiplicative system, as opposed to an additive system, is any more appropriate. Perhaps you can give examples of certain abilities that are better on 'better' commanders?

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

This is more or less correct. A 'pure mage's' attack and strength stats are basically worthless. Unfortunately, that's not really inside my purview. (I.e., it's not my fault that attack and strength factor so little into magic.) Besides, if it were abnormally high, it would stand to reason that you could, theoretically, make some sort of combat commander out of them.

However, this is more or less a moot point, because 'pure mages' generally have low (normal) combat stats.

Perhaps I need to be clearer in what I intend to do. I do not plan to create a system to value commanders, and then 'pigeonhole' all the commanders into that system. I intend to attempt to discover a system that gives the large majority of commanders an accurate gold cost, and then apply that, to see which commanders are over/undercosted.

Any attempt to apply different standards to different commanders will require a subjective apportioning of the commanders into different roles that I feel could jeopardize the larger work.

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

Just as a simple example, take this none-existing unit:
HP 1
Attack 30
Defence 1
Strength 30
Protection 1
AP 30
and this unit:
HP 16
Attack 16
Defence 16
Strength 16
AP 16

According to the additive system, both are exactly the same, while it is obvious that the second is a much better unit.
as another example you can take the first unit and up its HP, Defence and Protection to 30, according to the additive system that unit is now almost twice as strong as before, but according to the multiplicitive system it is 27000 times better, which IMO is a better represntation. (Okay, I realize 27000 is a bit too high, but you can scale down the results to recieve more normal values.)

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

I see where you're coming from, but (IMO) I don't think I have to worry about it. After all, I doubt anyone is going to try to make the first unit, right?

And then again, there's always extenuating circumstances. Give that 30 Att, 30 Str guy Etherealness and Luck, and... well, his low def/prot/hp was just mitigated to a large degree.

I'm not saying your example isn't instructive, but do you have an example from the game that is this distorted?

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

Would these values be counted before or after adjusting the equipment? As an example, Ulmish Lord Guardian will get prot 20 but -8 or so def with his equipment.

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

One commander factor that I don't see mentioned (but may have missed) is slots. Maybe it doesn't matter so much since most commanders have either humanoid or horseman slots.

Does the mounted tag seem to be factored into the cost in the regular game? Perhaps it is that mounted commanders also have other good stats, but they always seem rather expensive.

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

All right. Using my current formula:

HP 1 -9 (remember, base of 10)
Att 30 20 (same as above)
Def 1 -9
Str 30 20
Prot 1 1 (assuming base prot)
AP (I don't have much to figure in for this yet... this will probably be taken care of by the 'mounted' tag and a few other things.)

So that comes to 23 points.

HP 16 6
Att 16 6
Def 16 6
Str 16 6

This comes to 24 points. Yes, that seems to be about the same. I think the fault lies in the negatives (that is, values below 10), as they have a greater impact than positives. Still, I could try to come up with a progressive system that takes this into account. Unfortunately, I think it would have a lot more 'end math' needed to get it to the point where it could be applied to something like gold cost.

Well, you didn't list the protection of the second unit at all. If you're referring to base protection, increase the second unit's cost by 16 (making it 40 to 23). Now, if you have a hypothetical unit of 'all 30s', you'd have:

HP 30 20
Att 30 20
Def 30 20
Prot 30 30

I get 90 for this. As compared to 40. A little higher than twice. Now, if you assume a base of 0 prot (i.e., their protection comes from armor), you have 60 to 24. That is a 2.5x difference.

Is it foolproof? Probably not. However, I think my method will be a good 'rule of thumb'. At the present, I also only plan to use this with commanders, not troops. That makes an additive system IMO a slightly better idea. (Commanders get slots to use magic items. This tends to 'even out' things, especially for combat builds.)

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

AFAIK, equipment only has a resource cost, not a gold cost, and so equipment is ignored when calculating this (all base stats).

Since commanders can have magic items anyway, this is probably the 'best' way of going about it.

Re: Random Picks and Modding...
 

I do plan to see whether or not slots make a difference. Again, the horseman 'bootless' issue will be wrapped up in the mounted tag.

As mounted seems to increase AP in combat (and its encumbrance avoidance), I do intend to evaluate commanders on their 'mountedness'.

First data: Abysia
 

Well, I have looked into Abysia. Perhaps it was not the best one to start with, but it may help matters. I'm still trying to 'tweak' the leadership numbers, but here's how it currently stands:

0 - 0
10 - 5
25 - 10
50 - 15
etc.

That's for normal leadership. Undead leadership costs twice base, magical leadership triple base.

Anyway, here are the 'breakdowns' for each Abysia (base theme) commander, for stats, leadership, and magic.

Slayer:
Commander: 10
Stats: 19
Leadership: 0
Magic: 0
Total: 29

Warlord:
Commander: 10
Stats: 18
Leadership: 15
Magic: 0
Total: 43

Beast Tamer:
Commander: 10
Stats: 16
Leadership: 20
Magic: 0
Total: 46

Anathemant Salamander:
Commander: 10
Stats: 8
Leadership: 10
Magic: 140
Total: 168

Anathemant Dragon:
Commander: 10
Stats: 11
Leadership: 10
Magic: 300
Total: 331

Warlock Apprentice:
Commander: 10
Stats: 4
Leadership: 5
Magic: 110
Total: 129

Warlock:
Commander: 10
Stats: 6
Leadership: 5
Magic: 257.5
Total: 278.5

Demonbred:
Commander: 10
Stats: 24
Leadership: 35
Magic: 200
Total: 269

Now, we have some assorted 'bennies' to hand out to the Abysians. They ALL have Heat (and thus Fire Immunity) and Wasteland Survival. In fact, that is all that the Warlord/Anathemants/Warlocks have left. Looking at the Anathemants, a cost of 30 seems to be 'about right' for Heat and Wasteland Survival.

Survival seems a weak ability, so 5 points sounds about right. That leaves 25 points for Heat. Exactly how that splits up (Heat by itself vs. the Fire Immunity... probably thinking 20 for Immunity), I'm not concerned yet. In any event, that seems to work there, so adding...

Slayer:
Subtotal: 19
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 49

Warlord:
Subtotal: 43
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 73

Beast Tamer:
Subtotal: 46
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 76

Anathemant Salamander:
Subtotal: 168
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 198

Anathemant Dragon:
Subtotal: 331
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 361

Warlock Apprentice:
Subtotal: 129
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 159

Warlock:
Subtotal: 278.5
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 308.5

Demonbred:
Subtotal: 269
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 299

Okay. The Warlord comes out more expensive than in the actual game, but the Beast Trainer and the Anathemants are more or less right on, as far as costs go. (Commander costs always seem to be rounded to the nearest multiple of 5.) The Warlock Apprentice and the Warlock are also a little overcosted, but they are capital-only, and so that may or may not be important. (I may have gotten the Warlock's magic calculation wrong as well, so I'm going to recheck that.)

The Beast Trainer supposedly has Animal Awe, but I doubt that really makes much of an impact, and so it's 0. Judging from the Slayer, Assassin (and Stealthy +5 to go with it) seems worth 30 points, so that's what I'm using there. As for the Demonbred, he's the real oddball. He's already over his 'normal' cost, and I haven't adjusted for Flying yet.

Anyway, I might take a look at Blood of Humans, and maybe Pythium, and get back to you guys some refinements.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

I would give the captiol only guys -10% or so simply because they are cap only. Makes sense that capitol only mages should be cheaper, as they are 'exclusive'.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

You need to factor in "Sacred." It reduces upkeep by 50%, so I would make it multiplicative (x1.5 to x1.75). I would certainly pay 1.5x to get "sacred" on a mage that will be around for a while, and that doesn't even include bless effects (air shield, lightning resistance, quickness, reinvigoration, twist fate... wow!)

Re: First data: Abysia
 

Why is magical leadership so costly? There aren´t that many magic troops around which require huge amounts of magic leadership.
In fact the only one I see massed are mechanical men.

Undead and even regular leadership are far more important most of the time.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

Normally, I factor in a 20% reduction, but I'm not going to mess with that until later.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

That's why it is costly. With undead leadership, you NEED huge amounts for it to be useful, so it is cheap. With magic leadership, even 5 points can be highly effective, so it is valuable. Generally, magic leadership is already paid for by path cost, but sometimes it is separate (magic leaders, Illithids, Salamander trainers, etc).

Re: First data: Abysia
 

As I found out in an earlier analysis, sacred commanders have no cost increase over other commanders. At least, those that are priests have absolutely no cost increase over other commanders. The rare few that are not priests probably do have a cost increase.

It's rather counter-intuitive, but every single priest's cost would skyrocket if you added an extra 50% to his cost.

Really. Just tote up the magic costs on any mage out there, add 30, and you'll see that there's no extra charge for sacred commanders. I believe the Shaman is the sole exception.

As a counter-example, I offer the Daughter of Avalon.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

Undead leadership also applies to leading demons, which is why it's so valuable.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

Are you sure priest costs dont already take into account being sacred? I would think 3 magic paths is alot better than 3 priest paths, so if a level 3 priest costs just as much as a level 3 mage, I would hope hes sacred.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

For myself, I think it does include it. A Holy-3 priest costs 50. 2 in a magic path (which is the equivalent) costs 90 for the first, 60 for the second. Therefore, it is quite inexpensive.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

Warlords are more expensive because they are ambidextrous.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

Actually, that would push their cost in the wrong direction. Any unit or commander that has 2 or more weapons gets ambidextrous. I cannot see a way to quantify it. Well, I can, but it 'messes up' the math.

Basically, I already have the Warlord costing 15g more than he does. If I add in his ambidextrous ability (at 1.5-2 per point), he'd be about 80g instead of 60g.

The same point could be made about the Slayer.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

Where are you seeing 50 gold for holy 3? For C'tis its 120, for Caelum its 90 ( yes he has flight and is stealthy, but all Caelum commanders are cheaper then they are worth, including the seraphine ), for Machaka 90, and for Jotunheim its 200!

Seems more like its 50 for holy 2, but like 90 for holy 3,

Re: First data: Abysia
 

From Illwinter's site, Holy-2 is worth 20, Holy-3 is worth 50, and Holy-4 is worth 150. This is what I use.

As for the different costs of different commanders that have Holy-2/3/what-have-you, one of the primary reasons I am going through this analysis is to find out why they are costed differently.

More Data: Through Ulm
 

All right, overnight I have been working through quite a few more of the Commanders. I am done through Ulm (all versions). First, I will list what specials I've encountered, and the costs that seem to approach what fits the observed data.

Heat (including 100% Fire Resistance): 25
Elemental Resistance: 1/10% (100% would be 10)
Survival (any): 5
Amphibious: 10
Sacred (without priest): 20 (guesstimate)
Communion Slave: 20
Mounted: 40 (yeah, go fig)
Cold Blooded: -5
Stealth(0)/Scout: 10
Spy: 20 (incl. Stealth(25-30))
Assassin: 30 (incl. Stealth(5))
Glamour: 15 (probably undercosted)
Recuperation: 5
Forge(25): 10
Drain Immunity: 10
Siege(x): 2x
Defense(x): 2x
Standard(x): .5x
Inquisitor: 10
Summon Wolves: 10
Fortune: 20

All right. I'm going to list commanders by nation/theme, and their 'calculated values', and 'actual values'. Comments will be held until after each nation/theme.

Blood of Humans:

Abysian Commander,43,35
Newt,88,80
Sanguine Acolyte, 88, 100
*Sanguine Anathemant,218,220

Re: Newt vs. Sanguine Acolyte, they seem like they're about 90g. I think Illwinter decided to give an equal disparity (one goes to 80, the other to 100) to sort of differentiate them.

Atlantis:

Atlantian Scout,32,20
Shambler Chief,51,50
Consort,92,80
Coral Queen,241,230
King of the Deep,287.5,290
*Initiate of the Deep,49,60
*Deep Seer,233,180

The Deep Seer is clearly anomalous. This I do not find to be indicative of an issue with my methods, as the Deep Seer, going from a simplistic 30g+210g (magic) would cost 240g.

Pythium(base):

Scout,20,20
Assassin,54,60
Centurion,26,30
Emerald Lord,50,80
Serpent Lord,74,130
Theurg Communicant,47,50
Battle Deacon,47,90
Theurg Acolyte,63,90
Theurg,190,150
Arch Theurg,416.25,380
Hydra Tamer,42,55

The Emerald Lord, Serpent Lord, and Battle Deacon seem to be badly overcosted (which comes as no surprise), while the Theurg and Arch-Theurg are undercosted (again, no real surprise). Something I am noticing is that my method consistently undercosts 1-path mages. Mainly it's because I am trying to 'work out' the 'base 30 cost' that Illwinter lists for commanders.

Pythium Serpent Cult:

Serpent Acolyte,66,80
Serpent Priest,209,190

Man:

Forester,27,25
Castellan,31,30
Monk,44,30
Bard,78,75
Lord Warden,85,130
*Daughter of Avalon,128,80
*Mother of Avalon,163,130
*Crone of Avalon,292.5,230

As expected, the Females of Avalon are highly discounted. The Lord Warden is about as bad the other way. As a note, Sacred on commanders really cannot be valued at more than 20 points, because at that point the commander may as well have Holy-2, which gives Sacred for free.

Man Last of the Tuatha:

Sidhe Champion,140,140
Sidhe Lord,277,280
Tuatha,430.5,390

Glamour being 15 points came from these guys, as it made the Sidhe Champion and Sidhe Lord come out right. Somehow, I thought it would be worth more...

Ulm:

Spy,30,30
Commander of Ulm(any),32,30
Black Lord,79,130
Master Smith,156,140
Siege Engineer,55,50
Priest,29,50 (note: this is the base priest)
*Lord Guardian,47,80

Iron Faith Ulm:

Black Acolyte,28,40
Black Priest,138,140

Black Forest Ulm:

Commander of Ulm,21,40
Ranger Captain,33,45
Illuminated One,61,80
Member of the Second Tier,143,160
Wolfherd,46,50
Fortunteller,89,90

That's through Ulm. I'm going out of town this weekend, so I may not be able to update, but I hope to get the rest of the national comanders done by late next week.

If anyone has any questions or comments about the calculated values, ask and I'll go through it for any issues.

Re: More Data: Through Ulm
 

There may be some kind of capital only bonus. It seems like the best non-magic guys get a penalty. Emerald Lords, Black Lords, Lord Guardians. I'm not sure why this is, because I would personally like to see more thugs, always more thugs. And then obviously races be various specific bonuses as well (like the daughters of avalon).

Re: More Data: Through Ulm
 

I would agree on the non-magic part. Not so sure with the rest. Even with a 20% reduction in price for capital-only (which is more than most are willing to give, I believe), the Daughter of Avalon is 20g over her actual price.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

These are intended to be read as on top of the commander cost. Landing type 2 priests in the 40-50 range, and type 3 priests 80-90 etc.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

I understand, Johan. What I am doing is the following:

Example: base priest

Infantry: 10 (This is the cost to be an infantry commander. It presumes you are straight 10s in combat stats, Encumbrance of 3, base protection of 0, with no Leadership, Magic, or Specials.)

HP(9): -1 (HP, like most stats, are assumed to be a base of 10. If you deviate from that, you cost more/less depending on it.)

Prot(0): 0
Mrl(10): 0
MR(13): 3
Enc(4): -1
Str(9): -1
Att(7): -3
Def(7): -3
Prc(10): 0

Totaling the stat points, I get -6.

Leadership(10): 5

As stated above, a Normal Leadership of 10 is worth 5 points.

Magic(HH): 20

This is right off of Illwinter's site. The Priest has no 'Specials', so totaling:

Infantry: 10
Stats: -6
Leadership: 5
Magic: 20
Total: 29

Does this match Illwinter's projected cost for a Priest? No, it doesn't. OTOH, it may be more fair. As it stands, a Priest is good for a few things:

1. Building temples, preaching, and banishing undead. This is presumed to be part of the 20-pt. cost for a Holy-2 person.

2. Moving troops around. Unfortunately, a commander that won't die to the first attack from a militia and that can move more troops, costs the same (by this formula).

Basically, I feel that in cases such as this, charging 30g for a body that simply cannot fight (or even stand up in a fight) is too much. 10 is much more reasonable.

One of the main purposes of this exercise is to find where the balance points are in commander creation. Armed with the results of this exercise, I plan to do a 'rebalance' mod similar to Saber Cherry's, except apply it to the commanders, across the board.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

What is encouraging so far is that the results of your cost formula tends to echo what other players mention as under- and over-priced units. Very cool.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

I had noticed that myself. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif Well, I want to play with BF Ulm a little more, and then I'll work on some of the other nations.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

Scott,

the price for the preist you calculated may be very close to the actual cost of the preist since you did not include the cost multipler for sacred. I don't know what that multipler is ( somewhere between x1.5 and x2.0 ). But if it was half way between those two points x1.75 you get a cost of 50.75 which is perfect!

Re: First data: Abysia
 

Huzurdaddi,

Yes, that would fix it... but would break all the other priests.

An Anathemant Salamander would be 300g with that multiplier. An Anathemant Dragon 540g. Etc. etc.

If someone can show me where a priest is not sacred, I might try to work it into the costs somewhere. Until then, I'm going to keep working on this, and then try to analyze everything 'at the end'.

I'm much more inclined to think that a priest is balanced at 30 than to try to apply arcane formulae so that his cost comes out to 50.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

Wuldn't holiness be taken into account by the H2 cost similar to the bonus abilities given to other magical disciplines? Illwinter's site says (in general) it is a 50% increase. Look at Pythium's Theurg however:

The Theurg costs 150gp/1rp and has magic paths of A, W, S2, H3. Ordering the paths from highest to lowest we get:
Basic Commander Price: 30gp
S2: 1st Path, level 2 = +90gp
W: 2nd Path, level 1 = +20gp
A: 3rd Path, level 1 = +10gp
-----
150gp
But wait a minute!
H3: Holy Priest = +50gp

So the Arch Theurg (according to Illwinter's scheme) gets H3 for free--not including the 50% sacred cost increase.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

Re: First data: Abysia
 

Living Ermor has non-sacred priests.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

I see... If you see where I am going with the example above, there are many instances in the game where units are given substantial cost bonuses, regardless. Most Holy units are sacred, but few take into account the cost increase for sacredness, and some do not even take into account the actual cost of Holy magic--cite also the Monk, cost 30gp, H2; that is unless, the Monk's "body" as Scott mentions is worth only 10gp and then, his sacredness is still free OR included with the cost of H2.... That still leaves the conundrum of units like the Theurg.

Re: First data: Abysia
 

Well, theurgs are cheap because they can't really accomplish much without a large set of communicants backing them up. Theurgs and arch theurgs have base encumbrances that are extremely high for most spellcasters as it is assumed that you will have many communicants around.