Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

As I said I would in the thread on wish-kidnapping, here is a poll on clam balance. Specifically, I am refering to massed clams. I can't really define where clam horde begins and 'a few' ends, but it's somewhere around the transition from site income to clam income, IMHO. If you think that's a lousy definition, use your own, unless its something like, 'a horde is more clams than commanders,' or some such stupidity. Please do not consider other gem producing items.

N.B. The first option is not a vote about astral magic, just that the astral pearls from clams are too useful for their price.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

While not possible, I would like to see some additional limiting factor dependent on the current number of either clams in play or clams in the possession of the forgers nation.

Cost increase, path increase, reduction of income (1/2turns), whatever. I think anything over 50 is excessive, but they did have to spend the mage time and resources to get to that point.

If nexus is the problem, fix nexus. If wish is the problem, fix wish.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

The only people that will really notice the problem are nations that get into the late game of long games. Otherwise I'm sure they think clams are fine.

It really is one of those things you have to experience.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

They're important and probably a vital strategy in a large game, but they're not unbalanced. Diversifying is important to the late game, and that means that everyone will have access to clams and/or blood stones at some point, and once they do the income disparity won't continue to grow between natural clam nations and ones that have to find indies or empower to pull it off.

So it can be an important, maybe even vital, strat for long games, but it's not unbalanced any more than researching is, which is also a pretty important strategy for the late-game.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Micah is correct, however it does come much easier to some nations than others.If you get unlucky with your indy mages it can be significantly difficult to catch up.

In longer games you do not want to be the one nation without a gem item factory setup in the late game. 60-100 astrals per turn is huge.

It's the fact that clam whordeing is almost a required strategy in a long game that is unappealing to many people.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Yeah, if people agree that clam hoarding is a necessary strategy for long games, I think that's really not good. No strategy should be effectively necessary, especially one that doesn't require skill and isn't really fun in itself.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I think that rising your income is as important and that it does not need more skill as research does not make it a bad strategy. I think the problem is that some nations do have access to it and some nations not. In perpetuality, most nations have a gem income around 80 at turn 66 and if a nation is seriously clamming, then her gem income is the double of it. Now the nations that cant clam (or build earth stones) are a little (little is subjective http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif) bit on the disatvantage.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

KO has said that he never wants game play dictated to a narrow set of choices. On large maps, Clam hording-which is not fun-is clearly necessary if you want compete.

Compounding the problem, it requires zero skill, and combined with wish, can allow a "dolt" to win a large game against a superior player who refuses to use such a lame tactic. And it is a lame tactic.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I don't think clam hording is a lame tactic. Honestly I don't even believe in calling a tactic lame. That sort of language is what bad players use in the arcade when they repeatedly get tripped in Mortal Kombat. If you can't beat a tactic, don't call it lame, adapt to it.

That said, I do think it is *boring* when there is only one choice. It should be made clear that almost every nation begins to become one terrifying amalgamation where late magic diversity means that everyone has access to all spells, so it's not surprising that the game slides into a single tactic state after a certain point.

I really liked Baalz's suggestion that there be a spell that destroyed all items of one type. I think this would make clam hording a much risker investment then it is now, where you're basically guaranteed income from the gems the turn after their conception. Obviously you could tweak the spell, maybe it only cuts the number of them in half, or some-such. There's only about a billion ways you could make it different but still use it to discourage massive amounts of clam hording.

Jazzepi

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Researching pretty much fits all of the criteria people are complaining about, but I don't hear anyone wanting to take that out.

It is non-optional in any sort of long game.
It is harder for some nations to research than others.
It is not fun.
It requires about as much MM to set a turn's worth of mages to research as it does to forge and assign a clam.

The only thing it really has going for it is that it takes some skill to prioritize the path order.

Also, the UW nations (possibly excepting LA Rlyeh due to freespawn) have a hell of a time being relevant on land in most games even with clamming, something would need to be given to them to compensate if they were removed or nerfed.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Research isn't comparable to clamming at all. The complaint, valid or not, behind clamming (or any other gem production item) is that investing in it absolutely vital to stay competitive in the late game.

Research, however, has so many different varied paths that equating it to clam hording is just silly, prioritizing research, and even researching in response to/anticipation of a particular threat is very important. It separates the good players from the bad. I also think researching is quite fun. It creates an interesting tension between access to fewer spells of higher level, or more spells of a lower level.

Jazzepi

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

As velusion said clams are very potent in the long games no doubt about it - especially after wish is reached. Removing them (or having some ridicilous spell being able to destroy them) is not a good choice however since you will basically cripple high astral dependent nations like R'lyeh.

At the current cost they will take 15+ turns to pay off basically, which is a risky investment.

I think a good solution is to mod them for whatever game you are expecting to play. In a short-mid game keep the original cost. In long games on large maps that is expected to go 100+ turns increase their cost slightly (by 5 water or nature gems). Of course in such games blood stones should have their cost increased as well.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I think clamhoarding is OK the way it actually works. Anyway, a less "artificial" way to counter - but not too much - clamhoarding would be to add a slight chance oh being horror marked for the bearer of the clam. Something similar to lightless lanterns for example. Similar to blood contracts would be too much imho.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

The thing is there are so many ways to increase gem income that I think it is silly to isolate one tactic of increasing gem income and say that it is unbalanced. I think the problem that people have with it is the flexibility of astral pearls. But, consider this, if you have 20 clams a turn, and you are alchemizing them, you will only have 10 gems after you do so. Is 10 gems significant? If it was adding to a gem income of 5, sure that's significant, but if it is adding to a gem income of 25, its not as big of a deal.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

You don't alchemise as a rule. A better option is to use wish and turn your astral gems into x2 other gems. A reasonable good position can turn out 75 clams by the turn of say 60-75. If you use those gems to cast wish(gems) each turn you have basically increased your gem income with 150 gems. That will probably double your ordinary gem income - not to shabby!

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I voted claming is fine exactly the way it is and I am non-clammer, I have only seriously clammed once and that was as EA Oceania. It did me no good whatsoever, as EA Caelum won the game.

If clamming gets nerfed, then the, 'nerfs', abit like smurfs will just jump on another part of the game and try to nerf that as well.

I would suggest that if you are a nation who can't gem spam then you should seek to attack gem spammers, especially if you are playing in a long game.

Like I think I have said before, its much, much more easy to blood hunt then gem spam. By the time the gem spammer is getting 100gems/turn, the blood hunt spammer can be getting 400 - 600 blood slaves per turn.

Its part of the late game, the entire idea of the late game is too unbalance the game. In your favour, so you can win!

Loads of things unbalance the late game such as:-

Limited uniques to summon.
Unique artifacts.
Gem spamming.
Blood hunting.
Globals such as Arcane Nexus, Forge of Ancients, Utterdark etc...

Usually they end up spread around several players which creates a balance which is resolved by war, sooner or later.

So where's the problem?

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I'm coming down alongside those who think clams are too good. (As are most of the other gem-producers, actually, clams are just simpler to talk about.)

I don't think the price per se is the problem, just the unlimited nature of them. 18-25 turns to get a return on your investment is ok, but there's no other real way in the game to make "investments" like that... and as anyone with a bank account knows, interest can rack up exponentially over time. While admittedly a kludge, the fix I like best is simply a cap to the number each nation can produce.

Plus, I find the "in-game story" argument also compelling. Why is the world not flooded with such things by day 1 of the Middle Age, if mages can produce items that replicate the natural burgeoning forces of the world? Why haven't all nations converged on Astral, Fire, and Earth magic, with secondary Water, Nature, Blood? The tactic is too good to make much sense in the setting.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Maybe the simplest solution would be to give the gem producing items a small (like 2%) chance to wear out, so that you cant have too much of them. If there would be a 2% chance, a clam would exist approximate 50 turns, so you pay 20 gems and get 50 back.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

The weight of these "in-game story" arguments are always in the eye of the beholder, and therefore unpersuasive. One can just as easily come up with an in-game story why the world is not flooded with these by the Middle Age (forgotten secrets of construction rediscovered with awakening gods!).

There's a lot of stuff that doesn't make sense in D3, depending on what your "in-game story" is. But these stories don't make good arguments for changing the game mechanics.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

If someone get's to strong through clams, his opponets were not aggressive enough. Getting an overpowered clam-hort running is a big investment (now, mainly for the 15 water gems). You should not be able to affort this while in a full scale war with someone else.

So, the two options to do clamforging (in my opinion) are:
-You are the only water nation left and don't (strongly) battle the land.
-You were good in the diplomatics.

The first point has it's own drawbacks, so I have no problem with this one getting strong through Astral pearls.
The second - well, if you succed on that plan, you deserve it. Your opponent should not have let it come to that point.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Well, I do think clams are in a different class than blood stones and fever fetishes as they're much easier to mass and astral gems are much more useful late game than earth or fire. It's also wrong to think that it takes 15 turns for them to pay off - there are several ways to reduce this ROI time not to mention that astral pearls are often more valuable than water or nature. To be honest, I can't think of much more scary than R'yleh suitably turtled underwater keeping the Forge of the Ancients up for very long (or closely allying with someone who does).

The thing about clamhoarding is there is *no* counter and I think it's a mischaractarization to even really think of it as much of a risky delayed gratification in a lot of circumstances. For the cost of two clams (at whatever discount you can wrangle) I've now got one "free" mind hunt per turn as well as building long term exponential growth. Win-win in a lot of circumstances where water gems don't have a high value use.

My main problem with it is most everybody agrees it's so overwhelmingly powerful that everyone must do it if they want to be competitive, and it adds micro which most everyone hates. I look at it this way, would the game be more or less fun without clam hoarding? If its not really a tactical choice because everybody must do it in long games then removing it doesn't reduce your tactical choices it just reduces micro. Better than removing it though is to nerf it cleverly enough that it is more of a risky choice and therefore not a no-brainer.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Not everybody, at least among poll-responders.

It would be interesting to know how many of the nations listed as winners in the Hall of Honor clamnmed.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I do not think looking at the hall of fame has any value.

1. You would have to know the size of the map. Clams are not going to be a factor in small-medium games.

2. How many water provinces and races were in the game. It is much easier to clam if you are a water race and are not worried about being attacked early in the game.

3. What is the skill level of your opponents both in the game and the ones neighboring you.

4. Diplomacy. It is hard to say race "x" is better than race "y" because if "x" is feared then he may be ganged up on early out of mutual fear by weaker races "a" "b" and "c," allowing race "y" to win the game even though it is not as strong as "x."

So I think input from players the community respects as knowledgeable players is of more value.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Why not attach a negative to clams, like horror mark, insanity, curse or disease? It creates a drawback, and also has the effect of taking some of them out of play over time. The problem now seems to be that there's no downside to the strategy (except for monotony, and people getting annoyed at you.)

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Ew, I wouldn't suggest anything that encourages more micro while leaving the same utility if you do it right. I'm in a game right now with my first and last fever fetish farm - I finally said screw it and am forging 30-odd rings of regen because it's too much of a headache. Not the most competitive thing to do but I was getting to dread my turns - "which of these ever increasing number of diseased guys have less than 3 hps left?"

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Clams are nerfed strongly in dom3 relative to dom2.. I feel like this nerf makes them just right, except in long games. Perhaps a mod making clams more expensive to be used in long games would solve the problem?

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I think there is just such a mod for those "all nations" games.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I think the 62 player megagame has influenced alot of people on clams and clamming.

Velusions already said he will include a mod to make them more expensive if he starts another such game.

Rather then changing them in the vanilla game and effecting everybody, its probably best that a mod be applied in long MP's. The host/modder can then change them as he sees fit and people can choose for themselves wether they wish to play or not.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I disagree. If most MP games are not being won by clam-hoarders, we can say that under normal conditions it's not an issue.

If clamming is only an issue on a. large maps b. with clamming water nations c. with player of equal (preumably high) skill d. who nevertheless do not use diplomacy to gang up on the clammer who is "stronger" and would otherwise win, then you are talking about a limited set of circumstances.

The response to a turtling clammer should be to rush (crush?) them, not change the game to eliminate their strategy.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I do have a big-game mod for use in larger games where gem producing items are increased in cost which I *hope* helps somewhat with large games (Sophistry and Nuance are using them so we'll see).

While you can mod a "fix" for anything the thread is addressing vanilla games.

The real fix would be to somehow scale these to work with larger games and a number of suggestions have been offered (many probably unfeasible). I don't think Dom3 actually scales that great in a number of other areas either (i.e. Arcane Nexus).

That said, I seriously doubt these scaling problems will ever be addressed. For now we just have to use mods to adjust things, which is a perfectly fine secondary option.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

If all of those are needed, sure it isn't a problem.

On the other hand I think the large/small game distinction is important. If, for example, every game on a 200+ province map or every game that lasted past 75 turn was won by a clammer, I think you could safely say it's a problem.

So looking at the HoF could be useful. It should be pretty easy to get size of map, from the game thread if nowhere else. You'd have to ask the winner about clams, though.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

This is an option if it is a land nation. In practice I don't see very many land nations attacking fortified turtled sea nations unless they have no other targets.

Also, since the graphs don't adjust for gem generating items, sometimes it's hard to tell who is really spam clamming.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I do see an impressive number of EA wins by R'lyeh in the Victorious Nations thread, and I thought they were perceived as a generally weak position. Clamming could explain that, perhaps, but then any clam nerf would seem to disproportionately hit EA R'lyeh, if that's their main strength.

I don't see disproportionate wins by the other aquatic races listed in that thread.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

In early age, R'lyeh is unbeatable underwater. They clean other water nations, and no one wants to touch them. They clam, they get astral vortex up, game over. Seen it happen earlier, seeing it in Scorned Land right now.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

But if that is the case, why are people not ganging up on R'lyeh early?

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Probably because of their ability to beat(apparently) other water nations - Oceania and atlantis both bordering R'lyeh isn't extremely likely, partially due to the fact that many maps aren't made to support 3 water nations.
Even with a teeam of several people, its hard to dislodge a water-focused nation from its home early on using only indy troops.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

A land nation has to expend many more resources to attack an underwater nation than the underwater nation has to spend to defend itself. As a land nation that means your return on investment in fighting a water nation is much lower than if you picked a fight with a land nation.

This means you really need some sort of alliance to make it worthwhile to go into the sea early and such an alliance is sometimes very difficult to form when there are so many other tempting (and easier) land targets.

The widely accepted MP method for dealing with medium/large underwater nations is to leave them until the very end when the resources you can bring to bear are overwhelming and you crush them with raw force.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Whats this EA R'lyeh is unbeatable in the water?

AFAIK, in the early part of the game EA Oceania is the most dangerous water nation.

If all 3 water nations EA Oceania, EA R'yleh and EA Atlantis share the same ocean, then EA Oceania will come out on top if it rushes the other 2 early. Knights of the Deep with bless wastes everything in the path, in the water, for the first 30 turns or so.

If you mean LA R'yleh, then yea they are a severe problem. The can clam to there hearts content, generally speaking.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

In addition to clams in long games my theory for the R'lyeh dominance is that R'lyeh has such good astral casters - and astral in the late game is usually stronger. Plus R'lyeh is popular and there are some people who are very knowledgeable about about playing them. EA R'lyeh usually has a problem getting out of the water however - whereas it's my understanding that MA/LA have less problems.

I've also heard EA Oceania wins quite a few - though other than the fact I know they can clam with their national mages I don't know much about them.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

EA Oceania dominates EA Rlyeh and EA atlantis in a head to head conflict - just amazingly strong (water only) blessables.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Can we keep the discussion to clams please. The balance of EA Rlyeh, although somewhat related to clams, is not the issue at hand. If EA Rlyeh is boosted overmuch by clams, and a clam nerf makes them useless, we can buff them in other areas.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I have voted that clams are fine as is, although I lean towards caution in the areas of Very Late Game, Alteration Bonus, and Nexus, having too little experiance in large-scale no-holds-barred multiplayer. I play Patala, and can say that they have enough weaknesses (S1 on a 400something gold mage? AAH!) in any case. Given the difficulty of forging them, I believe that Clams are NOT overpowered.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I think it is telling that there are only 4 people who have responded that say that clams are always overpowered.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I don't, really. Clams are a late game strat, and if they are overpowered, its only going to be apparent late game. Also, some o the no-votes are from maily SPers like myself. I have thus far forged two clams in MP games.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

Limited experience caveat, few late game appearances:

In a mid-sized game (9-12? opponents, 15 prov/per) playing EA TC I had about 60-70 clams by turn 80. They weren't a main part of my strategy (considering I didn't have one), but every turn I'd forge 1 or 2 gems/hammers permitting. By about the same point I had about 15 fetishes and 30-40 stones as well.

EA TC has pretty easy access, the occasional natural forger and usually an easy +1W buff (robe, ring) to get to 3W1N.

Due to the inexperience, I threw up nexus at one point, made tons of astral gear, and had a wish going about every other turn. Somehow my pretender got insanity, so the wishes were a bit erratic. I usually wished for more gems, and occasionally slaves which fueled my other summons pretty handily.

In general I don't think the producers were the reason for my good position, but they didn't hurt either. I pooled the gems every few turns and used them instead of bulking them up for monster casts.

Like someone mentioned earlier, there are very few "investment" opportunities, and by late game they really start to tell.

I'm in favor of large game specific modification of gem producers. I like the disease/insanity/horror mark ideas if applicable.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

This will just mean that you have to move your clams around, i.e just more micromanagement involved. I prefer a cost-nerf instead of one that increases the dullness of handling these items.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

disease possibly, but I'm not so sure on the other 2. Happy with a cost change as well, although I really wish it was dependent on game/individual totals. Sucks that someone who will be building 10 just to offset income gets hit as bad as the guy who builds 100.

For fetishes I usually just pick up a random indy commander or high HP low importance commander and remove right before they die. Bit of a pain to check hp, but not terrible.

Insanity would just make the unit temporarily unuseable, while the gems still accumulate. I usually put them on my researchers so it would force me to put them on other commanders, lesser researchers or purchase indys - which i don't think is a bad penalty.

Horrormarking, I never move my lightless around and have only been hit by horrors like 4 times in 8 months I've been playing. Not sure how they're measured, but would probably say a bit more severe then lightless - tart chains maybe? Not sure how the items are really ranked.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

I think that the changes in Dom3 have made rampant clamming (ie: turning over your inventory in clams every turn ) a thing of the past. But they still have some effect on games.

However, there is one thing about clams that I dislike, and perhaps this is what irks other people: clams are not reported on the gem income graph and it can be a big surprise when some nation who has been a mid tier nation suddenly busts out with the highest level magics.

The solution to this problem seems pretty simple: include generated gems in the gem income graph.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

heres a stupid but relevant question. Why is no one *****ing about sea king spamming?

Sea kings cost 35 more but provide a commander/water mage and troops. and only costs 3 water to summon, so its easier to get. It takes 55 turns for them to pay for themselves, but that is not taking into account the commander and units.

In my limited experince Sea king spamming does not happen. I think its the cost. So i say raise the cost to about 35 or 40 and be done with it.

Re: Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?
 

The reason people spam clams is because you can reduce the cost with hammers and a forge. Everyone who is talking about how clams pay for themselves in 15 turns clearly hasn't ever clam horded.

If you have a hammer, and a forge up, a clam costs 1 nature and 5 water, I believe. It's something ridiculously cheap.

Jazzepi