is it not too much?

Pocus · #1 November 5th, 2003, 06:07 PM

Just realized that summer lions, after having doubled in cost, were also reduced to 75% of their doms I HP (33 versus 44). Fall bear remained at 52 hits on the other hand.

I feel it is far too much. Summer lions in doms I were powerful, but not as unbalanced as some can think. They were very vulnerable to damage spells (blade winds will make short work of them) for example.
I see them as so toned down that I think they will be mostly deprecated, and nobody will use them. Balance yes, but not like that!

to end on a more positive tone, what people now think of the 3 drakes? They remained at 11 gems, so overall they are more interesting. Would you get some now, or do you feel they are too costly? A fire drake now cost only 2 fire lions eg.

[ November 05, 2003, 16:10: Message edited by: Pocus ]

Wendigo · #2 November 5th, 2003, 06:20 PM

I think that the hps of seasonals vary with the season now, maybe you should hit end button a few times and keep an eye on them.

apoger · #3 November 5th, 2003, 06:38 PM

I don't like the seasons or the seasonal effects of the seasonal spirits. It's unnecessary complexity.

Even at the (effectively) reduced costs, the only drake I like is the cave drake.

johan osterman · #4 November 5th, 2003, 07:00 PM

Dominions is shockfull of similar unnecessary complexity, it's part of it's charm I think. And I think the seasons and the seasonal variations adds flavor.

licker · #5 November 5th, 2003, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by johan osterman:
Dominions is shockfull of similar unnecessary complexity, it's part of it's charm I think. And I think the seasons and the seasonal variations adds flavor.

I don't know if I'd call seasons unnecessary complication. Complication yes, but minor, and balanced over a longer game. There have been other suggestions that would really have added unnecessary complications, but let's not bring those ghosts back to life eh?

PS, Pocus, check your PM please

apoger · #6 November 5th, 2003, 07:17 PM

It's my game philosophy that complexity should only be added when it adds to the enjoyment of the game.

What we have to ask ourselves is:
Does having some "flavor" from the seasons add enough enjoyment to counter the hassle of having to pay attention to seasons in order to optomize your magic creatures.

Honestly I don't think so.

I also don't see any additional benefit from the slight dominion shifts due to seasons.

What I do see is arguments that four seasons make a year and thus four turns is a year and [blah blah blah] isn't realistic in a year. "This % of growth isn't realistic in a year". "My troops shouldn't have to spend all of three months to pillage a province". None of this was an issue when using "turns". Having generic turns allowes suspension of disbelief for many things. By declaring 1 turn = 1 season you have backed yourself into a design corner and must now justify things according to time.

It's only my opinion, but my opinion is that seasons added little if anything to the game, and created perception issues that haunt your game design. I think it was a bad choice.

Gandalf Parker · #7 November 5th, 2003, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by apoger:
It's my game philosophy that complexity should only be added when it adds to the enjoyment of the game.

What we have to ask ourselves is:
Does having some "flavor" from the seasons add enough enjoyment to counter the hassle of having to pay attention to seasons in order to optomize your magic creatures.

There is also the other side. Does it add a new strategy to use in balancing what might be considered a killer tactic? We had the cold-loving races and the heat-loving races. They used Dominion to push their needs ahead of their movements. We had summer lions and fall bears which were used strongly.

Now we have seasons which apparently shift those bonuses slightly. This means that if you watch the seasons and time your attacks correctly then the advantage your opponent had will be weak. It doesnt seem that the shifts are enough to be game-breakers but enough to take some of the edge off of balancing questions.

licker · #8 November 5th, 2003, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by apoger:
It's my game philosophy that complexity should only be added when it adds to the enjoyment of the game.

What we have to ask ourselves is:
Does having some "flavor" from the seasons add enough enjoyment to counter the hassle of having to pay attention to seasons in order to optomize your magic creatures.

Honestly I don't think so.

I also don't see any additional benefit from the slight dominion shifts due to seasons.

What I do see is arguments that four seasons make a year and thus four turns is a year and [blah blah blah] isn't realistic in a year. "This % of growth isn't realistic in a year". "My troops shouldn't have to spend all of three months to pillage a province". None of this was an issue when using "turns". Having generic turns allowes suspension of disbelief for many things. By declaring 1 turn = 1 season you have backed yourself into a design corner and must now justify things according to time.

It's only my opinion, but my opinion is that seasons added little if anything to the game, and created perception issues that haunt your game design. I think it was a bad choice.

Heh, believe me, I agree 100% with your philosophy

I'm just not sure that seasons are such a complication that they are worth worring about. Sure they have an effect, but it is apparently minor, or it allows (forces, whatever floats your boat) you to plan your attacks when using seasonally affected troops better. That is a change, but it's hardly gamebreaking, infact it could be looked at as a balancer for the seasonally affected nations and troops. I dunno, you can like it or not of course, but its not a game breaker.

Anyway, why is it normal for one to assume that the 'months' on a Dom2 world are the same as earth months? Why is it normal to assume that the abstracted 'realities' of Dom have to fit in with Earth-like realities? 1 season = 1 turn (or is it three?) is true, but who's to say what the length of one season is? We can bicker about this all you want, but in the end the analysis needs to be based on how a new game element affects game mechanics, not on how well you or I or anyone else can rationalize the choice of words...

Of course you have addressed the issues of balance and why you don't like them, but the 'realism' sword cuts both ways

-edit... Bleh... no I didn't read Gandalf's post before I posted mine

[ November 05, 2003, 17:27: Message edited by: licker ]

Pocus · #9 November 5th, 2003, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wendigo:
I think that the hps of seasonals vary with the season now, maybe you should hit end button a few times and keep an eye on them.

I suppose that on average they stay at 33, but yes, when I saw their price, I didnt even bothered to call some (as I practiced them quite a lot in dom1).

edit :
I can be wrong, but it seems that the fire drake breath can ignite the 8 surrounding squares around the splash area. Can be of use.

[ November 05, 2003, 18:46: Message edited by: Pocus ]

johan osterman · #10 November 5th, 2003, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by apoger:
It's my game philosophy that complexity should only be added when it adds to the enjoyment of the game.

What we have to ask ourselves is:
Does having some "flavor" from the seasons add enough enjoyment to counter the hassle of having to pay attention to seasons in order to optomize your magic creatures.

Honestly I don't think so.

I also don't see any additional benefit from the slight dominion shifts due to seasons.

What I do see is arguments that four seasons make a year and thus four turns is a year and [blah blah blah] isn't realistic in a year. "This % of growth isn't realistic in a year". "My troops shouldn't have to spend all of three months to pillage a province". None of this was an issue when using "turns". Having generic turns allowes suspension of disbelief for many things. By declaring 1 turn = 1 season you have backed yourself into a design corner and must now justify things according to time.

It's only my opinion, but my opinion is that seasons added little if anything to the game, and created perception issues that haunt your game design. I think it was a bad choice.

I partially agree with you on the turns versus the months issue, there is a point in keeping turns and other similar mechanics abstract as it avoids consistancy issues. On the other hand I do think the Calendar adds flavour, and it was a feature several people requested.

Also you say that seasons are an additional optimisation hassle, frankly I do not why taking seasons into account is different or more detrimental than any number of other strategic decisions. Launching your big attack at Niefelheim in the beginning of spring in order to suffer less from the cold is, to me, both a meaningful and enjoyable strategic dedision.