[kasnavada]

With all due respect renojustin, I think you need to learn basic statistics, and not to repeat things that have been proven wrong...

6000 + 40% = 10000 ? Woah. In case you do not know, A has 40% more income than B means B got 29% income less than A, not 40%. Then again, you are considering you've already won, since your assumptions take into account 1/3 of the map under your control. By that point most of the game is past and luck can't keep up, only because of the limit of 3 random events per nations. Some other thread about luck had shown that you needed about 15 to 20 provinces for the event to "max out" on most turn, if I recall correctly. That's plenty enough to have a decent magic economy that reduces the influence of gold in the game. Magic can and will reduce armies to rubble, no matter what they cost, in late game.

If that limit of 3 events was raised, however, the results of a test would probably be around what endoperez has shown : there is not much difference, no "better way" : the game is meant to be balanced after all, as much as it can be, and scales are fairly easy to balance...

Another thing, you keep repeating 40% ? Nope, it's more than that actually. Yeah, basic math again... (100 + 21) / (100 - 21) ~= 153%, that's 53% more income. At least, if you're going to say the same argument over and over again, at least check that it's true. Same for events, it's not 15% more events you have, but (100+15) / (100 - 15) = 135% : 35% more events (only considering order / turmoil, not adding 15% more from luck, since I don't know if they add or multiply).

Your failure to recognize turmoil / luck as a more or less equal path than order in my opinion caused by that you either fail to recognise the effects of luck and events, or that you need a predictable environment to play. Both of which are fine, but in that case, say "it's the way I enjoy playing most", not "it's the best way".

For high level magic, especially nature's bounty, a spell that I can't see ever working in a MP game (for several reasons, one of them being that it's a lvl 9 spell, the other one being that no one is going to leave this spell for long). And there are much better uses for 70 nature gems than a spell dispelled in 2 turns, especially since you already seem to think you can easily have others...

You're probably right in thinking that your strategy work, but I can't stand seeing blatant lies like "it's the best strategy", when that statement is just an "educated" guess, based on nothing but some personnal opinions.

Now, if you really want to prove your point, either test completely it and prove it, or just do like all other participants to this post have : show one or more ways to play, the strategies you've thought of, and let them decide whether it's effective or not.

Thank you in advance.