Thoughts on balancing MA Man

[Twan]

Aezeal said:
but does oceania have much MP wins?

I don't think the number of MP wins is relevant for most nations (I answer here but it's also an answer for some posts in new nations threads).

Many recorded games are newby games, and some of the best nations are only that good with heavy microgestion and fine knowledge of some game mechanics. An example of that are communions, national summons or magical economy based nations. Arco/Pythium without communions or correct management of them, Hinnom without a good microgestion of blood hunting to be able to pull the endgame summons, Oceania without a clam hoarding strategy, Utgard without a werewolves+shrouds based strategy, are all only average (under average for Oceania). Now with proper use of their strengths they are in the very powerful category IMO (perhaps not Oceania, but it is at least in the good half for long games).

The real umbalance is when a nation correctly played and with average start position always beat most others even if they are also correctly played and had same opportunities from start (or is beaten by most others like Man). And it's rare to have any MP with both equal skill players and equal start positions to be sure...

The things to search are : do one nation best strategy just make it as good as other nation using under average strategies or really gives it chances to win even against well played opposition ? is there any counter against one nation best strategy ? do nation A tend to win against nation B but is balanced because there is nation C in same age, and C usually beats A but can easily be beaten by B ? ...etc...

A little more work than saying "this nation is weak because it had no victory" (or the reverse).