Population

[Catquiet]

Originally posted by Zapmeister:
If there's any chance of some event-tailoring, I'd like to see them rise in effect (not frequency) with time.

As an example, an event may net 50 gold on turn 1, but the same event could be worth 250 or 500 gold on turn 20, 1000 by turn 50.

I would rather see events have increased effects based on the number of provinces you own
instead of just time.

Right now more provinces will give you a better chance at multiple events (up to three), maybe you could have a chance of an event having a boosted effect based on the number of provinces under your control.

Of course Illwinter might decide to apply this to bad events also.

[Chris Byler]

Originally posted by Keir Maxwell:
Through playing bless effect races I've gotten along way from the Dom1 economic model of playing and I do find it refreshing. I have got some good results with turmoil/luck races and my latest S&A test actually had incredible luck leading to an explosive start with extra mines, gold, hero's all in the first 4 turns. My base production was not far under an order/misfortune race by turn 5. However this is the only time I have come out really well out of luck in many tries. Normally good events contribute a bit more than bad events cost using the lady of Fortune and about even without. In general I feel order/misfortune is significantly more powerful unless you have a good reason to run with turmoil.

I would like to see luck improved by furthur tailoring of events to scales and the economic benifit of order slightly decreased. I am uncomfortable with the idea of misfortune returning to Dom1 which would make the standard order race use luck 0 instead of misfortune3. This would significantly reduce the amount of order bless effect races one could play and devestate order based dual bless effect races (ie two magic paths at 9). It would however leave untouched turmoil/luck bless effect races.

In general I am happy wiht the downward spiral of population in a dominons game. The wars of Gods are not good for mortals. Still playing +3 growth I expect to finish with alot more population than I started.

Cheers

Keir

I don't think order 3/misfortune 3 should be 21% extra income essentially for free. (Or 120 nation points for free, depending on how you look at it.) That's why I want to see some of the event frequency modifier moved back to the luck scale.

With the current order/luck scales:
Order 3/luck 0: 120 points, +21% income, very few events of any kind.
Order 3/misfortune 3: 0 points, +21% income, very few events (most of them are bad).
Turmoil 3/luck 3: 0 points, -21% income, lots of events (more than half are good, but with the current event set, you will be doing well to come out even overall).

On the other hand, with the suggested changes to order/luck (order is +/-5% events per step, luck is +/+5% events per step, major disasters restricted to below certain levels of luck):

Order 3/luck 0: 120 points, +21% income, few events (although not as few as the present Order 3).
Order 3/misfortune 3: 0 points, +21% income, standard number of events most of which are bad.
Turmoil 3/luck 3: 0 points, -21% income, lots of events most of which are good (and the ones that are bad aren't crippling).

As the scales are now, if you are taking any amount of order there is no reason not to go all the way to order 3/misfortune 3. You get a lot more income for 0 nation points, and your disaster risk is not significantly greater than order 0/luck 0. Conversely turmoil 3/luck 3, although it also costs 0 points, is vastly inferior - the good events just don't make up for the constant floods, hurricanes, mass emigrations, etc. that plague your land of good fortune.

I understand what you are saying about order bless effect races, but I think order 3/misfortune 3 will still be viable - it'll just be a little more risky. You are actually losing something (or at least risking something) for those 120 points compared to order 3/luck 0.

Misfortune should be risky. That's what makes it cost negative points.

[Keir Maxwell]

Originally posted by Chris Byler:

I understand what you are saying about order bless effect races, but I think order 3/misfortune 3 will still be viable - it'll just be a little more risky. You are actually losing something (or at least risking something) for those 120 points compared to order 3/luck 0.

Misfortune should be risky. That's what makes it cost negative points.

If its just a question of greater risk that could be manageable and fair enough.

My experiance of playing misfortune in Dom1 was that it was suciude and thats why I'm worried about returning directly to the dom1 model. I may have had bad luck but I found misfortune unplayable in Dom1 and I would like it to remain playable. The risk for bless races is exagerated as pop killing event in your home province are as good as end game as your home province matter heaps more to the mass of bless races who can only build their key troops in their home province.

To be honest I have given up for now on dual bless effects races as they are hard to play at present and if the weight of opinion is reflected in the forthcoming patch there is a good chance they will be dead ducks. Sure it may be fine after the patch but I don't want to get to emotionally attached a races which maynot be viable next week. Seeing as I'm one of the only players with who has expressed any attachment to these races and most players who have commented on the matter arn't concerned if dual bless effect races vanish I'm trying to give up on my babies before they are ritually slaughtered.

It occurs to me that after the patch comes through turmoil/luck may be an essential basis for attempts at dual bless effects races.

Cheers

Keir

[SurvivalistMerc]

I'm still rather new to Dominions. And working too much to be able to really try out things the way some of you have.

But I will add my commentary to the thread anyway and hope that it isn't received poorly by my more experienced colleagues on the board.

I would actually like to see the number of points you have to play with not be a fixed number. Think about what that would do...everyone (ai included) gets the same number of points. You could see some very high-magic pretenders that way. And you would pay for your power increase by a corresponding power increase in your AI opponents or human opponents. Think of the new dimension it would add to the game! Folks would decide on the number of starting development points (or at least have the option of doing so) prior to a MP game.

I would prefer that the devs change the events to make fortune and misfortune more balanced. Fixed numbers of population lost rather than percentages of highly populated home provinces strike me as better than losing 1/4 your population as can happen now. Sure...you'd miss 2,000 people. But not as much as 7,000-8,000. And the effect would be less devastating.

Maybe a small amount of gems lost event could be made more common in unluck scales.

Or perhaps the national heroes could be beefed up. Anyone taking order-3, misfortune-3 will never see the national heroes. I take those scales a lot with ulm (my current favorite nation), and so I don't get the heroes very often. There are some very powerful summons in the game.... And none of the heroes is exactly a supercombatant...so I don't think it would be a bad thing to beef them up and make them more desirable.

It would be nice if order-3, misfortune-3 was about what it is now...just you would be giving up so many things that you would have second thoughts about taking these scales.

I already read Posts by some people who won't take the third misfortune so that they have some chance of getting a national hero.

If some folks think the combination of order-3, misfortune-3 is powerful, these folks have the option to use it themselves. There are already some folks on this board who seem (to me at least) to know far more than I do about Dominions who don't use those scales. And they don't appear to have adopted this position for purposes of handicapping themselves against weak human opponents.

If everyone has access to order-3, misfortune-3, would not those of you who don't like this combination but find it powerful agree that what is really being argued is the number of starting development points, which is increased if folks who would take some order for income anyway are able to take misfortune to balance it out without losing points?

If what you really want is to play with fewer points, why not just ask the devs to make the number of points selectable?

Just a thought. And I'm sure there will be folks who disagree with my novice perspective.

[NTJedi]

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:

I would prefer that the devs change the events to make fortune and misfortune more balanced. Fixed numbers of population lost rather than percentages of highly populated home provinces strike me as better than losing 1/4 your population as can happen now. Sure...you'd miss 2,000 people. But not as much as 7,000-8,000. And the effect would be less devastating.

I see there are lots of ways population will drop for a province. (events/magic)... yet very few ways population can increase.
There should be good events such as:
Settlers Migrating from faraway lands (random number between 1000 - 3000)
or
Sudden Increase in Marriages and babies (+10% increase)
or
Something!

[Taqwus]

Well, after excessive blood hunting perhaps there could be a chance of extreme bacchanalia so the participants can disqualify themselves from future blood hunts...

[Captain Scarlett]

"Settlers Migrating from faraway lands"

Actually........this exists. I had it happen a couple of weeks ago to me when I was playing Ermor.

I do agree that the more you take in fortune the less the devasting events should be and the better good events should be.

It seems to me that the one side of the scale is unbalanced.

If the majority of people are picking order-3 misfortune-3 then there is a problem. It should be a decision, not an automatic choice.

Just my thoughts
Cap