Why I Always Take Misfortune-3

[MaxWilson]

In this past turn, I just got 200 gold from a trade boom, 1000 gold from a good tax collection, and 200 gold from a prospector. I did lose 80 gold and 3% of my population to hailstorms. Still, I get lots of lucky events and the unlucky ones (barbarian attacks) aren't too bad, even on the rare occasions when something bad happens in my capital on turn 2 or 3. So Misfortune-3 feels like free points.

-Max

[JimMorrison]

The last time I played Misf3, at one point I lost 3 provinces in 2 turns to barbarian/knight attacks. My economy was already in bad shape (I can't figure out why ), and losing a couple of temples really did me no kinds of good.

Some of my builds go Misf2, but even that can be a bit of a hassle, if you have crappy PD.

Wish I had your luck with Misfortune.

[alhorro]

Gold is just contemptible metal, but when you need to cast some important spells or equip someone with gems and items, and your lab burns — it's much worse than any gold you can have even from luck3.

[Lokean]

Actually, the Luck/Misfortune scale is the one I tend to pay the most attention to depending on nation.

MA Ermor, for example, would seem like it would have problems with Misfortune, since you pretty much need a temple and lab with every fort for it to be useful, but I am usually happy to set Misfortune-3 on MA Ermor. The reason being, the most common bad events are population killers and attacks by independants; MA Ermor's PD is good enough to stop barbarians with 10 and has a reasonable chance of stopping knights with 14 and while gold is very handy stuff you'll usually have magic to fall back on by the end of the first year. Losing labs is certainly a problem, but you generally lay down more labs and temples than other nations, so losing one or two in a turn has less chance of crippling you, after the first year.

Yes, misfortune is a gamble, but it's not as clear as people make it out to be. High Misfortune and high Luck both call for strategic considerations on the part of the player to adapt their playstyle to the situation. Always taking Misfortune 3 is a common preference, but doing so makes you more vulnerable to players ready to exploit it, since you're probably putting less thought into how Misfortune changes your tactics.

[Tifone]

Augh, I'd never take mist-3 for the simple reason I want an even minuscule chance of getting a hero But I often end up with Misf-2, often with the results JimMorrison said above

[BesucherXia]

Yep, I used mis-3 in almost every games to pay for order-3. More gold = better expansion, more mages in the long term. But recently I have somewhat changed my mind.

More provinces/more mages/more incomes also makes you like a common threat to others while luck+turmoil gives you more gems to diversify your magic.

Another fact: the barbarians attack will kill your population even if they are right defeated when they appear. Each attack seems to cause a population decrease of 15%.

Now I must consider it again before sleeping with mis3.

[Baalz]

The thing about misfortune, in my mind, is it's a constant push towards toppling you over. As long as you're on solid footing the bad events are easy enough to push back, but once you are in an earnest fight that steady push makes it a lot harder to keep your feet. Barbarian attacks aren't too bad when you can quickly retake the province, but they become a huge problem when all your troops are committed to fighting a war and you keep losing provinces you can't retake right now - just when you need them the most. A lab burning down is a moderate annoyance, until it happens when you needed forgings/rituals cast from there to support the war and now you're not only out the support, you're out the research, plus the gold for the new lab (which might very well be a huge portion of your available gold for the turn if your upkeep is high). And of course, it's all fun and games until something really bad happens to your capital early on.

Conversely, in a stalemated war several of the good events can get you the momentum to tip the balance. A couple thousand gold, an extra castle, a national hero, or a bunch of gems can be huge depending on the situation. Yes, obviously some of these can happen even with misfortune scales, but, well you could also have more income by taking turmoil scales and lucking into a bunch of high population provinces around your capital, or take sloth and hope you're surrounded by mountains.

To be sure, misfortune can be a viable choice, but it's far from free points in my mind.

[Tifone]

Yay, I agree. Just had the proof of that in one of my recent MP games... Took Misf-2 with EA Agartha without really thinking.
The necessity of big, slow armies on the fronts (experimental strategy) and the poor PD made the rest. 4 barbarian attacks (one to the capitol, putting it on siege and stopping the recruitment for one turn) and the capitol lab burning, all in 2 crucial turns. My enemy was doing well, but I had still nice hopes (he was sending out far more units than me but I had won all the major battles till the moment). I could just go AI.
Definitively not free points, something to consider with attention.

[Wrana]

Can only agree with Baalz.
And, as Lokean already said, it's a thing your strategy must take into account. Some nations can be just fine with Misfortune - generally it means they have strong & expensive troops, plus their national mages cover most of what's needed. If you need to diversify, though, Luck/Turmoil build is probably better. The same goes for strong national heroes. Probably cheap but high resources-intensive troops, too.
A question to MaxWilson - what nations you are playing most?

[MaxWilson]

Originally Posted by Wrana

Can only agree with Baalz.
And, as Lokean already said, it's a thing your strategy must take into account. Some nations can be just fine with Misfortune - generally it means they have strong & expensive troops, plus their national mages cover most of what's needed. If you need to diversify, though, Luck/Turmoil build is probably better. The same goes for strong national heroes. Probably cheap but high resources-intensive troops, too.
A question to MaxWilson - what nations you are playing most?

My current flavor is MA Ashdod. Other favorites are are LA Agartha, EA C'tis, EA Ermor, the old version of Helheim (pre-Svartalf nerf), and EA Marverni. (You can see that I'm strongly attracted to recruitable-anywhere mages, especially with Death magic.) MA Shinuyama would have been next but I'm not bored with Ashdod yet.

-Max