Two new MODs from me

[Pocus]

I wont play too, as of now, with these scales. Not because I dont like them intrinsically, but because there is a missing part in the mod, which will have to wait at least a patch: the modding of initial level of all pretenders.

I too would like to see scales which have a significant impact on gameplay. Hey, I have +1 productivity, look at this amazing +10% bonus in production speed. Yaaawwn. I thus concur that the changes of Apoger are ok because each scale is of importance, and has importance.

But as others pointed, the changes made unbalance the magic pretenders strategy, to the point that both Rainbow mages & blessing pretenders are unplayable, and I dont like to have less choices when I choose a pretender. So when this part too will be tweaked (thanks to a future patch), I think I will enjoy much this mod.

edited : some typos.

[ January 15, 2004, 16:49: Message edited by: Pocus ]

[Nagot Gick Fel]

Originally posted by Pocus:
I wont play too, as of now, with these scales.

Well, to be fair to Alex and his work, I'll give them at least a few tries (starting with a "Maenads lead the way" Pangaea), but I must say my first impression is very negative. I fear this mod will effectively restricts the choice of scales (0->+3 instead of -3->+3), and that can't be good. That reminds me too much of the no-brainer choices we were offered in Doms 1. Plus, with that high growth, I fear we might see the a comeback of the high taxes/patrol routine that was overabused in Doms 1 - with the added benefit it now gives you extra corpses to reanimate.

[Kristoffer O]

Alex's mods are now available at the illwinter site.

[apoger]

>Plus, with that high growth, I fear we might see the a comeback of the high taxes/patrol routine that was overabused in Doms 1

That's an excellent point that I did not account for. I'll do some testing with that.

[apoger]

>That's an excellent point that I did not account for. I'll do some testing with that.

That was an easy test.
Doesn't work, as the population loss easily overcomes the gains. Patrolling to supress unrest is really harsh!

[Nagot Gick Fel]

Originally posted by apoger:
>That's an excellent point that I did not account for. I'll do some testing with that.

That was an easy test.
Doesn't work, as the population loss easily overcomes the gains. Patrolling to supress unrest is really harsh!

If it was that quick, I assume you checked only with 200% taxation?

I've heard (didn't checked it myself) that population losses are exponentially related to the tax rate (like, taxing at 150% you lose X pop/turn, and 4 times as much when taxing at 200%). So high taxes might still be an issue, if the 'sweet spot' isn't too low.

[Edit: typo]

[ January 15, 2004, 18:42: Message edited by: Nagot Gick Fel ]

[apoger]

>So high taxes might still be an issue, if the 'sweet spot' isn't too low.


Easy enough to test for.
The sweet spot is 160% for not losing population.

Keep in mind:
This requires Growth+3, which you are negating with this strategy.
The bonus income looks to be about 110 gold per turn (with maxish exconmics).
However you must keep 40ish troops on patrol to supress the unrest, which cost approximately 400 gold and have an upkeep of about 60.
Thus the income bonus is about 50 gold.
Next account for the fact that sometimes the patrols miss and you take a hit from unrest, which intrudes heavily on tax income.

So for 120 nation points you'd squeeze out a few extra coins here and there. Not worthwhile compared to just allowing the growth scale to pump the popuation normally.

It's entirely possible that my scales may have issues, but I don't think growth/patrolling is one of them.