Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

For LA T'ien Ch'i, you have, per PD point below 20,
1 Footman(9 protection, no shield, decent damage)
1 Archer(9 protection and a 12 point damage Composite Bow)
1 Barbarian Horseman(with a Composite Bow AND a light lance)
40 Gold per point

For Patala, you get these(I didn't bother to figure out the numbers, because I don't CARE how many there are)
Some Markata "soldiers"(Morale 7, Melee Damage 8, yes 8, 0 protection, 5 hitpoints)
Some Markata "archers"(Morale 7, Bow Damage 6, yes 6, 0 protection, 5 hitpoints)
1/2 Per Point(YES THAT'S ONE EVERY OTHER POINT) Atavi "Soldier"(Morale 8, Protection 1)
1/2 Per Point(YES, AGAIN, THAT'S ONE EVERY OTHER POINT!) Atavi "Archer"(Morale 8, Protection 1)

Now, with the Barbarian Horsemen shooting their deadly Composite Bows and then getting a lance "one shot" to anyone who reaches them, I can see how they are going to lay down some damage. I can also see how any level of semi-decent archer fire is going to rout any quantity of Patalian PD. They just cannot win against anything with arrows. ANYTHING!

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

<insert comment about OP stating the obvious>

So what?

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

That's a good point. You know, 20 Indie Archers and a commander should constitute a deadly and unstoppable raiding force. I mean, how does that change anything? What effect, really, does that have on the game? So for 230 gold you can defeat 20 Patalian PD, maybe even the capital PD, with little casualities, and it would take something like 600 gold to defeat, WITH CASUALITIES, 10 PD of T'ien Ch'i. What effect does that REALLY have on the game? So Patala cannot stop raiders at all, ever. I mean REALLY, who cares. Give a necromancer a shield and have him span terror from behind an "iron wall" of 6 Heavy infrantry. Beats 20 Patalian PD like nothing. Take a 1000 gold army against any T'ien Ch'i PD, unless you want massive casualities.

How, really, could that have an effect?

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Patala cannot win ever. So what? That's a pretty bizarre attitude.

"Use thugs for raiding"

Who needs a freaking thug against Patala? ANYTHING WILL DO. Take a commander and 10 Indy Heavy Infrantry. I'm sure they'll tear through PD like nothing. So really, it's the Indy Commander cost, and the resource cost that's the limiting factor on utterly destroying Patala.

You could freaking RAISE your raiding force FROM THE BORDER PROVINCE ITSELF. EVERY OTHER TURN IF IT'S A MOUNTAIN! Hell, with good scales, the border province itself will even provide the GOLD to create the raiding force.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Hahaha

On a more serious note - yeah the wide differences of PD is a long discussed topic. Generally it is seen through the regular prism of dominions in that "nothing is equal". So some nations have good PD, and others have crap. Just like some nations have good troops and others have crap. Its the way of dominions.

So, if you know your nation has crap for PD, you just dont invest in or rely on it.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

You need a certain minimium strength to stop very weak raiders. Patala doesn't have that minimium.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

"Patala cannot win ever."

That's just going to get you laughed at brosef.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

While PD is not supposed to be balanced, losing 20 PD to 8 Agartha (normal) infantris and 2 indy archers turn after turn is something else. What's more, they did not even get a scratch, literally. For some reason, my entire PD starts to run as soon as one or two small monkeys are killed. I have given up on Patala PDs.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

The little monkeys have a morale of 7.

Since they count "equally" towards the "75% route and everyone routes" rule, if the little monkeys route, everyone routes.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Actually, my full statement is now that Patala, Bandar Log, and Kailasa can NEVER EVER WIN in a non-rush game.

It's supported by the MP results at the top of the Multi-Player forum.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

By this argument, Tir, Man, Eriu, caelum, machaka, and EA MICTLAN are weak nations. Somehow, I don't think that they are all that weak.

Tip:

When using data like this for evidence, it helps if you have a sample size larger than the possible results.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

well, EA mictlan has awesome PD above 20. I guess that's a little extreme, but I'm just saying... you get a (usually) double blessed jaguar warrior every point.

below 20 i reckon not so impressive though

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Are you actually claiming 20 Archers and a Commander can defeat a Man PD of 20 without casualities?

I'm sorry, your just gabbering now, and I can't take it seriously. When I took over a hopelessly bungled MA Man in some massive game, EA Ermor tried to waste me TWICE with armies of over 400 men. He has lost over 200 men and 6 mages. All to 65 PD and my research mages backed by 90 longbowman. Now 65 PD is quite high, but we aren't talking about 20 archers and a commander either. We are talking about 400 high quality soldiers and more than 6 mages assisting. That is an ARMY.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

I didn't rush. Patala and Kailasa aswell, I think, are one of the few nations where the mages can forge Clams out of the box. With Patala in perticular, every damn mage you have can forge Clams as soon as you get the Forge of the Ancients up. This is just one of the points where they rule in late game.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

No. Different claim.

None of those nations has won any of the MP games listed in the MP forum post you're using as evidence.

Nor has any age of Atlantis or Arcosephale.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

The PD is not supposed to be balanced. Each nation has good and bad, and for some of them thats their PD

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Okay, there is no way you are this stupid in rl. You've got to be trolling.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

In general, its understood that PD is going to be different levels for different players. Honestly, I think EA Neifleheim has it even worse. The "leveler", if you will, is that no nation's PD can stop an actual army except by extreme inefficiency in its application. The trick is to keep your own armies behind enemy lines and quickly take back raided provinces while patrolling choke and border points to catch incoming raiders. If you really feel this is to great a burden, then play a different nation. It really is that simple.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Is it really true that some nations have 'crap' troops? I don't know about that. Clearly some nations have excellent troops: some through potent sacreds, some through tramplers, and maybe some through martial skill (longbow/principe?).

Are there really nations that have through and through 'crap' troops?

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

EA Neifleheim gets a Jarl at 20. So I certainly hope you are joking. You are joking, right?

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

A Jotun Jarl, not a Neifleheim Jarl, and 10 militias with poor protection, attack, defense, and morale. 20 PD for 10 units that really aren't all that better than human militia. A competent raiding force will route the militia and the jarl with it before he can be the least bit effective.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Not another thread like this...

Right. Markatas are lame (actually, markata's are the most cost-effective unit in the game, as detailed in the other thread...) and monkey nations have markatas as PD. Who cares? Bandar log also has amoung the best summons in the game, decent mages, good sacreds, decent archers, and elephants. Nations are not made up of PD alone, thank the gods.

MP results are a nonissue, since several naitons (20ish) have never won an MP game. Normal distribution dictates that until we have (significantly) more results than nations, they are statistically meaningless (oversimplifying, I know.)

Also, Bandar Log has reasonable antiraider potential, with several remote attacks, teleporting mages, flying summons, and PD that actually stops call of the winds.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

This is the thread that started it all. Legends will emerge about this thread, bards will write poems about it. The other one was just an attempt to get past 100 posts in one day in a tour de force.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

I thought the Giants were 30 gold. It turns out they are 20 gold giant militia. Yes, they do suck. Yes, Niefielim PD is bad and yet Niefielim has registered a win in EA. Of course, they also have uber-sacreds.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Niefelheim PD is very bad. I never rely on them. Throw a 5 in there, and send some Jarls in if you really need to defend it.

PD is certainly very different depending on the nation. I really like Pangaea's PD. They have those Harpies that go in early, and tie everyone up for a turn or two. They all die or rout, but it gives your other troops/commanders time to form up and cast spells.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Pangageas PD is like free casts of swarm every battle.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

This is an example of the "lower standard" of reasoning to which proving me wrong is held. Mictlan has quite acceptable PD. It has 3 Warriors per point. Each Warrior has decent morale and a hide shield to stop arrows. They also have a tribal king to Sermon Of Courage them. Sure, they can be beaten up by heavy infrantry, but they won't route easy and you'll have to kill most of the 60 to do it. Worse, after 20 they get Jaguar Warriors. In a typical game these Jaguar Warrior are Dual Blessed and will kill more than their number in heavy infrantry. Their counter, archers, work very poorly versuses Hide Shielded Mictlan Warrior.

Mictlan PD starts out "ok" and then goes to "frightenly deadly".

The statement that the Machaka are considered a "weak nation" is correct. In fact, it is held by most of the people reading the board. Including those who disagree with me. Another player even made a point of mentioning how bad Machaka PD is. So yes, quite, they are considered weak.

Caleum is able to dispatch flying attackers to retake any captured province from a central location. One of these forces can protect 15 or more provinces with three movement. A nation that doesn't have to have an army "adjacent" to the captured province to attack and retake it obviously has a nice advantage in retaking provinces. Also, the speed with which Caleum can move forces around make large scale raids very hard... without defeating their army first. Nations of Fliers are a poor comparison.

MA Man PD is poor, better by far than Monkey PD, but poor. Of course they also get a Bard, an actual spellcaster who can cast a morale booster before battle and nature spells throughout. But yes, MA Man PD is weak. Score one point. They also have not won a single game, but I believe that is because they completely lack magic diversity.

The other nations are new, and I'm not going to create a game just to check them.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

You are missinterpeting, hopefully in ignorance, that argument. Those nations have not yet won an MP game, hence invalidating your 'appeal to statistics' contention. As thejeff has already stated:
"Quote:
Lord_Bob said:
Are you actually claiming 20 Archers and a Commander can defeat a Man PD of 20 without casualities?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. Different claim.

None of those nations has won any of the MP games listed in the MP forum post you're using as evidence.

Nor has any age of Atlantis or Arcosephale."

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

During DOM_2 I originally enjoyed Machaka, but the weakest PD is more noticeably painful on my favorite type of maps(LARGE). Today I still joke that Machaka PD can be killed with tennis balls.
One benefit of these discussions on PD has made me realize DOM_4 should allow gamers a way to upgrade the PD via one or more of the following research, gold/gems, new -/+scale, building type, etc. This would add another layer of depth for gamers.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

I don't think Machaka is a weak nation. I like them. Also I've won an MP game using Man (although I didn't bother to submit it to the Victorious Nations thread since it was only a 4-player game).

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Machaka is okay probably categorized as below average, but their PD has been agreed by many to be the weakest in the game. Did I mention their PD dies from tennis balls?
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

But they have awesome battle magic and powerful hoplites and spiders. I agree their PD is quite poor.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Man also has stealth units, Wardens of Avalon. These are very tough, and go along way to Raiding/Counter-Raiding.

So the situation is "the same" except that Man PD is stronger and they have Raider/Counter-Raiding units.

Did you have a bless on your Wardens?

The Monkey's have Atavi. Atavi with a Protection of 1 DO NOT go a long way to fixing the problem.

If Markata were given stealth, this would fix the problem. Actually.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

You're, again, completely missing the point of bring up Man.

It has nothing to do with Man's PD or Man's raiding ability.

Man and the monkey nations are the same in and only in that neither has won a MP game here.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

But everybody knows that if you put Markatas together in groups they get all chatty and excited and start grooming each other, gossiping, losing their cute little bows and rooting for the losing team. Charming, yes. Stealthy?

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

I don't really get this. Some nations have clearly inferior mages. Some have clearly inferior sacreds. Some have clearly inferior summons. Why is PD such an issue?

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

It isn't, except to about... oh... one person?

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Because to that one person only PD matters (apart from anti PD raiders, apparently). He has his crusade and he'll rant on and on about it to no-one in particular making foolish statements like "such and such can never win" or "with 65 pd such and such is unbeatable". All the while ignoring or misinterpreting any valid objections raised and failing to realise everyone already accepts that monkey PD is a bit rubbish.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Well, ... it's monkeys. What did you expect? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

They can desease their foes by throwing some dejections at them. It should also impact their ennemies morale !

More seriously, a chimp can kill a well prepared human with it's bare hands, so I think the lowish monkeys should be a bit stronger. It wouldn't change much their PD anyway, as going to battle bare chested (and without shields) is a call for an arrow.

Has anyone done some testing so we can elect the worst PD of Dom3? I think of giants, machaka and monkeys fighting each other for the first place.

Now we have our Don Quichotte, we would need some sort of Pansa to restrain him.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Quite frankly, if PD ever succeeds against a human player I think it says more about the attacking player than the defending nation http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Seriously, a well scripted mage should be capable of burning through any reasonable amount of PD in short order, unless you're investing silly money into the PD. Even then, your relying on the chance of the mage either KO'ing himself with fatigue or simply lacking mass destruction spells to deal with the number of targets.

Oh, and sacred PD is only good if the AI happens to choose bless rather than holy avenger or similar.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Because with some nations with very weak provincial defence you can't really see their strengthes in any other area, maybe.

I think Fomoria tops it:

-The provincial defence can not hit anything, has no protection or defence and a moral so absoluely horrible that it will rout the whole army.
-At the same time, the only good researcher/Ritualist is capital only. (and still no better then average compared with other nations)
-The only good unit is capital only.


And seriously, Banda Log is another good point. The provincial defence is sooo bad, comparing it to a good average is like comparing the sacret units of MA Ulm and MA Vanheim.
Problem is, that a sacret strategy is optional - Provincial defence is something you need no matter what strategy you are going.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Not really. I never bother with PD for Caelum (no point, Caelum's troops need scripting to be any use), and it's rare I put in more than four or five PD with most nations.
For those wondering, I find it more effective than the traditional 20 PD for putting off players looking for an easy victim. Just make sure they think the cash you've saved has went on your army instead http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Nations with good PD, such as EA Abyssia, tend to use it more because it can do a decent job. This can be a disadvantage as much as an advantage though - a couple of times I've foolishly invested in PD when actual troops would have been a better use of gold.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Caleum fliers are capable of rapidly countering such raids with their flying armies/mages. Stealth nations can "surprise and destroy" such armies. Also, they are capable of equal raids against normal PD with their stealth units, so it balances.

You not "needing" good PD because the enemy does not raid weakly is like saying the enemy didn't press the "I win!" button because there was no "I win!" button. A truism, yes, but not very important. If you have good PD, then stupid weak raids work as a surprise tactic exactly once. Then they stop working. It's not exactly surprising that your opponent doesn't build a strategy around something that doesn't work against you.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Uh,.. if a single stupid weak raid makes you go all nuts on PD and build 20 in every province because OMG 30 GOLD PER POINT, it already worked.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

In MP, I find that strong PD nations actually make the strategic decision more complicated. (Granted this is on the basis of having played exactly 3.5 MP games: Perpetuality = 1.5). If you know your PD is trash don't use it. Plop down PD 1 so scouts can't raid you and ignore the rest. But if you have good PD you have to decide whether or not to invest in it.

TC PD11 can stop most random event indy raids, for example. Prevents some income loss and diverting forces to retake provinces, but at the cost of a less mobile army.

But even here, the strategic decision never thinks PD v Human Opponent.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

If you don't even build a SINGLE point of PD, you will lose to any player worth his salt. Guaranteed. Qm and I have shown many newbier players to at least sink a point or risk losing provinces to a scout.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

As a slight but temporary hijack, I'd like to have you stop by the Fomoria thread I created.

I can't really disagree with the bulk of your post, and neither would I want to, but I'd like to discuss a few things with you before I decide whether to try them out in multiplayer. I don't have much experience with multiplayer- though I'm working on that continuously.

1). The only good unit is capital only? Certainly, unmarked troops and the giants and those nice nemedians are capital only, but are Fomorian Warriors just as bad? From their flavor it seems like they'd have a lower rate of afflictions. As well, unmarked champions are available everywhere as thugs. Certainly not Neifel Jarl or Dai Oni class, but do you consider those 'not good' as well? And while the Fir Bolg have several problems (helmet, anyone?) they seem solid with above average humanoid stats. I've had quite some success taking out indies with them, and I expect they'd be of some use against human nations.

2). I am rather appalled with their mages, though I do see some possibilities with Thunder Bow spam on the druids.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Fomorian troops aren't bad. Their javelins are pretty kick *** considering how cheap and survivable they are.

Re: Grossly, insanely different PD strengths
 

Some nations have mages as part of their PD... for example one nation has 1air and 1holy horsemen as commanders. As a result 3 rounds of combat with two of these PD mages usually results in 6 phantasmal warriors or banishing undead! Other nations have regular stand behind (do_nothing) commanders.

I don't mind seeing some nations with weaker PD, but hopefully DOM_4 will allow pretenders different options for upgrading existing PD such as improving the type of weapons being used, type of shields being used, and type of armor being worn, etc.