Clams overpowered?

[Yossar]

IMHO, clams are not the problem. The main problem is wish. Other things that could be part of the problems are ghost riders, vampire queens, and people playing on big maps with fewer people than the game is balanced for.

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by Norfleet:
In other words, something that will drive off the casual invader who hasn't thought his moves out.

No, more like something that will drive off virtually every other nation in the entire game, no matter how well together they put their army. How do you expect Marignon, for example, to be able to deal with it when their mages can't touch it?

What the hell are you doing in my dominion anyway? When you fight a tweaked SC on its home turf, it's SUPPOSED to be uphill.

Why should a lone SC be able to wipe out an entire mage backed army? You can't require that every offensive battle be fought on friendly dominion, or the game would never end.

Actually, we were just kicking this around the other night, and the best shot we've found at taking out a VQ conventionally is a Fire-9 bless on Valkyries backed by Dwarves.

That's not a particularly good strategy, since it is totally nullified by 100% fire resistance, which is far too easy to obtain. The autoparalyze duration of petrify is dependent on magic resist, and it no longer Lasts more than about 4 or 5 turns. That strategy also applies only to Vanheim. If only 1 of the 17 nations can counter a VQ, then there's a problem.

VQs aren't really that tough if you can nail them before they raise their shields:

How exactly are you supposed to do that, when it will just run through your script half as fast as normal, and spend every other action attacking? Give her protection over 25, and virtually nothing will get through.

Plenty of other options exist for targetting an SC's weaknesses.

Such as? Elemental magic is useless thanks to the overpowered elemental armor. Instant kill spells are useless thanks to MR boosting items. Curse is useless as it can't cause Lasting damage.

You see this as a problem, I see this as a fact of life that SOMETHING will ultimately climb to the top of the heap as the most potent chassis to build on.

That's ignoring the affliction issue entirely.

It's not as if planning around affliction removal is some sort of onerous chore, either. If affliction removal is such an immense problem for you, you haven't planned out an SC core strategy in sufficient depth.

The VQ requires no such strategy to remove her afflictions, and there are very few other pretenders that have the recuperation ability and any combat potential of note. The Lord of the Wild, for example, costs 150 points, 50 points for new paths, and is Pangaea only. Any other affliction removal strategy requires large amounts of nature gems, playing Arco, or late game magic.

Considering how often I'm the first to GoH anyway, you can clearly see that I've planned this in advance.

If you weren't abusing clams then you wouldn't be able to guarantee that GOH stayed up for more than a few turns.

I don't see how this is an imbalance against clams, more that water magic could use some better spell options.

If there is no better use for water magic than to convert it into astral magic, then that is a clear imbalance.

Clams are a long-run investment that don't truly pay off until the late game. I see no reason why people should be forbidden from aiming at a late-game strategy.

No late-game strategy should allow you to totally wipe out every other player simply because they didn't build exactly the same items as you. If you have another late game strategy of equal power, to a wish per turn, then why don't you spell it out, instead of claiming that clams aren't overpowered.

I have no objections to seeing clams increased in cost to something like 20W or 10W/5N, but I also do not see them as a serious problem.

That's because I doubt that you've ever played a game where you didn't plan to build hundreds of them yourself.

I do, however, feel that it's worth making a counterpoint, lest the only people with something to say be exclusively the whiners.

Whiners? Please. If you don't see a problem with clams, then I suggest you play a game some time where you build absolutely none of them, and your opponent builds a hundred.

[ April 16, 2004, 03:06: Message edited by: Graeme Dice ]

[Pirateiam]

Wow so much anger over the poor little clams!
Me...I like my clams with butter and beer!!!

[Reverend Zombie]

Whiners? Please. If you don't see a problem with clams, then I suggest you play a game some time where you build absolutely none of them, and your opponent builds a hundred.

If everyone hoarded clams, wouldn't that take care of the problem, as well?

The real problem I see with the game is...troops. If you do not think having more troops than your opponents is unbalancing, I suggest you play a game some time where you build absolutely no troops, and your opponent builds hundreds.

[Stormbinder]

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Norfleet:
[qb]Well, that shouldn't be a surprise. You don't to whine about it if you think there's nothing that's really wrong, it's only the people who want to scream for nerfs that have to cry loudly.

Actually, I find that it's the people who are deathly afraid of their favourite overpowered strategies being removed that complain the loudest. After all, you manage to show up in every clam and VQ debate and make vague statements about how it's not really that poweful. If it's not powerful Norfleet, then why do you always use the Vampire Queen, and always build as many clams as possible?

---

Very true. I find it amusing that somebody, who is using/abusing the same primitive clam-hoarding strategy that requires no strategic skills whatsoever in almost every game that he plays, calls the ones who points to this problem "whiners". It sounds very hypocratic to me. I was avoiding geting personal in the past, but you are crossing the line with your statements Norfleet, where you are trying to paint your opponents as "whinners" and "nerf-criers". Coming from you it just adds weight to anti-clams arguments.

[ April 16, 2004, 03:56: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by Reverend Zombie:
If everyone hoarded clams, wouldn't that take care of the problem, as well?

It might, if every nation had identical access to water magic and the same gem producing site in their capital, but that would destroy the variety in the nations.

The real problem I see with the game is...troops. If you do not think having more troops than your opponents is unbalancing, I suggest you play a game some time where you build absolutely no troops, and your opponent builds hundreds.

That's a perfectly functional strategy if you've selected the magic paths properly on a vampire queen. No amount of normal troops can defeat her, so it doesn't much matter how many get thrown at her.

Troops also don't provide the resources for unlimited growth of more troops. To get an income of 100 astral pearls from territory, you'd would need to control something around more than half of the world map at 75% magic site frequency.

[Stormbinder]

Originally posted by Yossar:
Hmm, reading the forums, you'd think clams were the biggest problem in the game. Yet, make a poll and the majority of people think they are fine. Odd.

Nope, not at all Yossar. It is small majority, and many of those who voted "Clams are fine the way they are now" just haven't used the clam hoarding strategy as it can be abused by dedicated clam-hoarders, and/or they haven't meet (yet) such player themselves in MP.

You can not really say that clams are overpowered or not until you really try hoarding them in at least one MP game, and fail or succeed, or until you face opponent who will do it himself and you'll see its effects on your game.


Quite an oposite, I think the fact that 40% of all people who stated that opinion said "Yes, clams are overpowered and need to be fixed" speaks volume about seriosness of the problem.