[johan osterman]

Originally posted by Mortifer:

quote:

---

Originally posted by DominionsFAN:
I think that there should be spells like summon population. Why not? This is a fantasy wargame afterall! All things should have some counter, that is the key.

Now we dont have counter when Ermor kills the pop, we cannot remove curse, and the curse spell is so cheap, Ermor cannot defend against turn undead..etc.
Frankly, some things are totally unbalanced.

I tend to agree with you on this.
Curse is a low level spell, and there is no spell like remove curse. Why?
It is a pain to play against Ermor, since it is totally wiping out the population of the provinces. We cannot summon/conjure/create population. Why?
It is hellish hard to remove battle afflictions. [In some cases it is impossible.] Why?
It is way to easy to 'get some' battle afflictions....

Seriously these things should be changed. Every tactics must have some counter tactics, it is a "key part" of all strategy games, this is very true! This has nothing to do with the "generic rock-paper-scissors" game type.

---

Curses will not win your games, cursing is a defensive and longterm tactic to hurt opponents. Most MP players do not seem to consider curses or afflictions as unbalancing. Curses are only a real limiting factor to players that concentrate significant effort to maximise one or a few units. Making curses counterable would make supercombatants both harder to deal with and the players using them less cautious. The same goes for afflictions. I am not sure that unbalanced is even an applicable term for single player games, frustrating yes, but unbalanced?

Why do you say it is too easy to get afflictions? Why should it be harder? In what way is the loss represented by getting cursed or gaining an affliction a less acceptable loss then other permanent losses such as loosing a unit. If you view your army as the combined strength of the units in it, getting the limp affliction on your Ice Devil Nycafor is not much different from loosing a lava warrior. Both represent a loss of total combat capability, why is one unbalanced and not the other?

People die in war. Population growth in games often give rise to cheesy tactics, where players first minimise taxes in order to max pop then raise the taxes as soon as it hits its growth shelf, or herd their population around their planets/cities like Texas Longhorns. Dominions is not a serf breeding simulation, many 4X strategy games are, that doesn't mean that Dominions II need follow suit. Is there any particular reason you think that population should grow more abundantly other than that it does in most other games? Population loss is as much a weakness as a strength for Ermor.

Dominions is a conservative game, meddling by centralised power structures results in damage that will only very slowly recover, social engineering doesnt work, the evil empire must be stopped before it destroys the world etc.

Also what wendigo said.