[TigerBlood]

Originally Posted by Calahan

1 - There is no real limit on how many gem gens you can create. (ok, 50 per turn, but that is not a good limit)

Theoretical limit. In a vaccum there is nothing wrong with this statement. In the context of an actual game, there are actual limitations imposed by any number of variables. Given ideal circumstances, 50 free mages all comfortably established, a steady gem income, sure you can fill your lab up every turn.

Practically, at what stage does this occur in a vanilla game? Turn 150, 200? The only reasonable explanation for a game dragging on that long would be multiple players all sitting in the corner turtling.

2 - There is no barrier to entry on where you can build them.

In a lab. In provinces you control. Otherwise true.

3 - There is practically no barrier to entry to creating gem gens.

No barriers aside from paths, gem income and the oppotunity cost associated with devoting a commander to the task when they could be doing something else.

Just because these obstacles are surmountable in ideal circumstances does not make them nonexistant or insignificant.

4 - Return on investment is way too quick, and initial investment required is too small

Return on the investment...

You're not just pumping gems into the ether. You have to have a mage craft the item. They do that at the exclusion of another task. Suppose they need a ring to get up to W3, you're adding that cost to the initial investment. A hammer requires more gems. A Naiad, Nushi or whatever requires yet more gems. A Naiad creating a clam with a hammer is going to require a lot of time to see a return on the initial outlay, even cranking out a clam per turn. 50 Naiads with hammers is not a small investment. 50 recruitable W3N1 mages is not a small investment.

This is an argument against all the current pricing of gem increasing effects (especially globals, that all have a stupidly quick ROI), but with gem gens Fetishes pay for themselves in around 9 turns (or 6 if you pre-disease the carriers). Stones in around 9 (using 5.5:1 slave:gem ratio), and Clams in a crazy 7. That is all way too quick. And because the initial price is so low, it's almost never a bad idea to forge them at any point in the game. ie. If you had to pay an upfront cost of 110W+30N to get back 70 pearls in 7 turns time, then it's harder to come up with the initial cost, and you do have to think if the upfront fee can be spent better elsewhere. But if it's just an upfront fee of 11W+3N, then you don't even have to think about it. As an analogy....

See above. It takes an incredibly long time before you start seeing a returns on your initial outlay sufficient to perpetuate further investment indefinately. Assuming you're up against an opponent or opponents with a similar base gem income, one that is using the majority of those gems for more immediate purposes, who do you think is going to have the advantage? To be clear, I'm talking about turn 30, not turn 260+. It takes some fairly unique circumstances or active collusion to bring about the scenario you are alluding to.

Some problems on gameplay

5 - The defender advantage synergies too well with high Astral.

Yeah. In the land of the Turtle Gods, Astral is King. If you're going to leave another nation to their own devices for 100 turns, you deserve to lose. I'll also add that your Astral Misery Scenario can occur in a game without gem gens. Big nations unwilling to overcommit against a foe in case they overextend themselves or get ganged up on. Not as epic though, and likely to get stale a hell of a lot faster

6 - The income is hidden

Oh noes. Ban Blood. Hidden Income is Bad!

7 - They make conquering lands an irrelevance

You're talking about a paradigm shift in warfare after multiple players have set up perpetual gem generation forges. Territories are still important.

8 - They are Micromanagement hell

I disagree. Then again, my preferences lean toward blood nations. Putting hours into a late game turn is not an issue for me assuming the game is hosted at a reasonable schedule (3-4 days) once the game moves toward the late and end game.

It only becomes a chore if the game has been allowed get to that stage and I'm clearly going to lose via eventual attrition. I usually have the sense to concede well before that point, assuming other victory conditions have not been put in play.

9 - Games get stupid.

Once you've seen someone running around with dozens of S5 empowered Wraith Lords, and MLichs with 200+ HPs, then you know for certain that gem gens are just a joke, and allow players to stop even trying to play well, by giving them free reign to start doing stupid things. (which is not a good gameplay feature)

Unless I was the guy running around with a dozen empowered wraith lords, I probably would have conceded the game by that point.

....go and organise a load of large scale games with Gem Gens with various other disbelievers. Play these type of games constantly until you get to the point where you are all highly skilled players. Then organise another bunch of large scale games with these skilled players, where most game are lasting over 100+ turns with multiple players having hundreds of Clams each. Then continue playing these games even though a single turn in any game is taking many hours to complete. As then and only then can you come back in 4-5 years time and give your opinion about Gem Gens based on actual experience from high level games. As if you do that then you will have recreated the MP history of Dominions 3 that has taken place on these forums, and maybe then you will understand why those who have been through all of that, or even just a part of it, have firmly concluded that Gem Gens ruin the game completely.

Yeah yeah. I'll go dust off my brothers well used copy of PPP. You can go back to measuring your post count with whatever account you favour the most and pretend it means something.

A few final points...

...tl;dr - Just listen to players who have experienced it, and accept it when they say that Gem Gen items ruin the game.

I disagree.