Who is the most powerful nation and why? - Page 4

Xietor · #31 March 21st, 2008, 01:55 PM

Looking at the MA, I do not think ctis belong in the top tier. They are too vulnerable early to solar rays, high level priests, and paralyze(which stops skelly spammers cold).

Their troops/mages can be somewhat neutralized by the cheap spell wolven winter cast in the province before the fight occurs. Ctis is certainly above average though. Very strong research and powerful death magic.

If they make it to the midgame look out. Banelord armies.

Arcos is also very good, but i give pythium/ermor an edge because of the weak national summons and arcos weak castle bought troops in the midgame.

Against an astral race elephants are less deadly. Though they have lots of s gems and mind hunt, they do not get to spend their gems on Angels. And nothing laughs at elephants quite like a hydra.

So while Arcos is definitely upper tier, i would not put them above Ermor or Pythium.

Falkor · #32 March 21st, 2008, 02:03 PM

EA: Nifelheim, for 3 SC's on turn6.
MA: Pythium, for nice balance between strong magic and decent troops.
LA: Ermor, for all the design points by pretender creation.

B0rsuk · #33 March 21st, 2008, 02:08 PM

Atlantis > Pythium. Principes are slaughtered by coral armor infantry

.
I know, I know...

WraithLord · #34 March 21st, 2008, 02:47 PM

Darn, my memory is not what it used to be. I checked the game thread (DDD) and indeed you played LA Mictlan

R'lyeh was played by okiN and although fared well wasn't a real threat to you.

Baalz · #35 March 21st, 2008, 02:55 PM

Quote:

moderation said:
How does EA Lanka stack up against EA Mictlan? I was reading a thread comparing who was the most powerful blood nation (I will post it if I can find it again). The gist of the arguments seemed to be Lanka is more versatile, but Mictlan is more focuses and has lower upkeep for it's primary blood hunters. Of course, perhaps you could switch to using summons for blood hunting and then not pay any gold upkeep, but I'm not sure how well that would work.

I was arguing in that thread (too lazy too look it up) that EA Mictlan has a tighter focus on blood than Lanka for a couple reasons. Not only are the blood hunters cheaper, so are their sacreds - and well pretty much everything. Mictlan also has greater motivation to focus on blood whereas Lanka could very well do a very effective weak or no blood strategy. Mictlan also has a good upkeep free national summonable blood hunter (who doubles as a leech spamming assassin) that pays for herself in about half a year. I'm not as familiar with Lanka, do they have a reasonably priced summonable blood hunter?

I think that Mictlan will be able to pull in more blood slaves and has more motivation to focus on blood research. I think they are the heavyweight champions of the blood game, but I don't know that I think they're overall stronger than Lanka.

moderation · #36 March 21st, 2008, 05:29 PM

Baalz: I found the Lanka vs Mictlan thread. I think one of the interesting things about Mictlan is that has less options early on, which can be refreshing. As a new player, I find that there are so many different directions that it is difficult to figure out what the optimal path to the mid-game is, so it's nice to have a clear cut objective, which is what I liked about your take on Mictlan. Of course having less options can also be a weakness... In any case, no comment for me on which nation is more powerful until I play a few more games.

Lingchih · #37 March 21st, 2008, 07:15 PM

Quote:

moderation said:
As a new player, I find that there are so many different directions that it is difficult to figure out what the optimal path to the mid-game is, so it's nice to have a clear cut objective, which is what I liked about your take on Mictlan.

I always have a clear cut objective when I start any MP game. Then I invariably waffle and change my mind halfway through the game

moderation · #38 March 21st, 2008, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Lingchih said:I always have a clear cut objective when I start any MP game. Then I invariably waffle and change my mind halfway through the game

What's that saying, that a plan never survives first contact with the enemy?

Anyway, I get the feeling that EA and LA Mictlan do have a decent number of options once they get into their midgame, however they seem a bit vulnerable in their early game if you can counter their sacreds. Maybe possessing an uncommon advantage over other nations during the early, mid and late game stages is one of the markers of the more powerful nations.

hnchrist3 · #39 March 24th, 2008, 12:43 AM

Of course there is a difference between winning and being the most powerful. I chose LA-Ermor as it gets tons of freespawn; it thrives under Utterdark; Once it gains dominion in a territory, it is *very* difficult for any other nation to hold on to that province. Ever try to bring a population zero province back up to anything useful? I'm not even sure you can, but I am sure that doing so is a waste of time and resources.

If you rephrase the initial question, you may gain some insight:

"Whom would you least like to be your neighbor at the start of a game?"

Now you know why Ermor and R'lyeh are at the top.

Edratman · #40 March 24th, 2008, 08:26 AM

Quote:

hnchrist3 said:

If you rephrase the initial question, you may gain some insight:

"Whom would you least like to be your neighbor at the start of a game?"

Now you know why Ermor and R'lyeh are at the top.

I believe that is a much more accurate assessment. It is not who do you think is strongest, but who do you fear the most.