Some ideas: raiding, seiging, spell AI and more..

[Soapyfrog]

If everyone hoards then "great". However NOT hoarding is not a viable strategy. That's bad.

You might maybe get away with it on a small, crowded map... games that don't Last much past (or get called at) 40-50 turns will probably not see hoarding as a serious problem.

Large maps are fun becuase they are large, there is more opportunity for give and take, the game is more epic, more sweeping. But it loses most of it's allure as you are forced into a few narrowly defined strategies revolving around hoarding. So as you can see the things I find fun about large maps are mostly cancelled out by the devolution of the game caused by hoarding strategies.

It's like any game that has a shortcoming. You fix that shortcoming and you have a better game. It's not complicated.

[Endoperez]

I am on the same boat with Chazar. I don't understand why a hoarder should be able to win someone who has not hoarded but instead conquered twice or thrice as much provinces AND searched them for sites. Sure, if the hoarder is left to be for 30+ turns he will have beter income, but if he is attacked *now* with armies almost twice as large as his he is in great trouble.

Has this been tried, has it worked? If not, why? I don't see any reason for it to *not* to work... ...with all my experience I got solely by reading this forum and playing SP games.

[Soapyfrog]

Alright lets look at the game I am currently getting smashed in, Faerun Folly.

One player I know for a fact has something like 400 fever fetishes and 250+ clams.

How much of Faerun do you have to conquer before you can compare to that?

Another empire, who is smashing me, overran me with endless castings blackhawks, followed up by armies of mechancial men and multiple doom horrors. And this was circa turn 70... AND he had already been fighting several other powers. I do not know for sure but his astral income is surely in the hundreds. He was territorially probably twice as alrge as me, but he was also fighting two other people.

5 turns into the war I was OUT of gems... completely cleaned out and of course my gem production was insignificant by comparison so while he was able to keep slinging masses of remote spells every turn and generate new armies of mechanical men, I was reduced to a minimum of ritual magic and a desperate scrabble for resources. From there on in it was a downhill slide.

The only thing which has kept me, very feebly, alive is... you guessed it... soul contracts, and some infusions of cash and gems from another hoarding nation. Of course, I am doomed anyway but it just goes to show.

[Tuidjy]

Whine, whine, whine, *****, *****, *****.

There are too many strategies in Dominions II, and I cannot deal with most
of them! I especially cannot deal with more than one applied at the same
time. Lets change the rules we know to something completely untested, and
hardly making any sense! Lets remove any magic strategy that has been used
against me with any success! I wanna play with knights, archers and
groundpounders, although I think that knights should lose the charge bonus,
and the attack rear command should be disabled.

Whahhh!

Guys, if you do expand quickly, you will lose the game. If you do not build
reaction forces, you will lose the game. If you do not make alliances that
benefit both parties, you will lose the game. If you do not have some
hoarding strategy you will lose the game. If you do not have a good idea
about what your opponents are doing, you will lose the game.

If you do all the above, you may still lose the game.

And if all of the above are removed, the people who are kicking your *** will
adapt, and still kick your ***. Only, Dominion II will be a lot less fun...

[Soapyfrog]

Pardon me but it is certainly MORE fun with no hoarding. More possible strategies, less micromanagement. its a NO-BRAINER.

But you belong to the reactionary "nothing is broken" crowd. I'll bet you thought the VQ was dandy.

You seem to think that Illwinter have created the perfect game, perfect in all respects, in no need of tweaking/modding whatsover. Ah yes, truly, ignorance is bliss!

[Arryn]

Soapyfrog said:
But you belong to the reactionary "nothing is broken" crowd.

By definition, someone who believes "nothing is broken" is a conservative and thus the opposite of a reactionary (someone who feels a need for change). You really ought to understand the meaning of the terms you sling.

[Soapyfrog]

Reactionary and conservative are quite synonymous terms.

As a quick source to back up my use of the word, here is a definition from dictionary.com:

"Characterized by reaction, especially opposition to progress or liberalism; extremely conservative."

The term you are looking for is "revolutionary" which is the opposite of "reactionary".

[Arryn]

Soapyfrog said:
The term you are looking for is "revolutionary" which is the opposite of "reactionary".

My bad. You're right. I read "revolutionary" when you actually wrote "reactionary". I really am senile today. I should just go back to bed. Either that or go load up on caffeine.

[Esben Mose Hansen]

Arryn said:

By definition, someone who believes "nothing is broken" is a conservative and thus the opposite of a reactionary (someone who feels a need for change). You really ought to understand the meaning of the terms you sling.

Actually, Soapyfrog's use of the word was quite appropriate. See e.g. wikipedia

[Tuidjy]

Soapyfrog said:
Pardon me but it is certainly MORE fun with no hoarding. More possible strategies, less micromanagement. its a NO-BRAINER.

Pardon me, but 'cast black servant', 'forge fetish', 'forge clam', and
sticking the Last two on the former is no more micromanagement than any
other strategy requires. And please explain to me how _removing_ a
strategy opens up more strategies? Or are you one of the deluded fools
who think that any strategy is a garantee for success? Because in one
game, I'll end up facing someone who is hoarding at least clams and devils,
and most probably fetishes, judging from the fortified temple in each
province of hers. Oh, by the way, she also is second in provinces and
research, and has supercombatants, and a wished pretender. And you know
what? I do not intend to let her win the game.

But you belong to the reactionary "nothing is broken" crowd.

I belong to the intersection of the 'Win with the tools you're given'
and the 'Can't stand rebels without a clue' crowds. Or so I like to
think. Care to prove me wrong in a 1x1?

I'll bet you thought the VQ was dandy.

I thought that the VQ was a newbie friendly pretender, and possibly
underpriced. At the time, I did not consider myself good enough to be
positive. I have fielded VQs in a MP game twice. Once after the VQ nerf
was announced, to see what the big deal is, and once after the nerf, to
win the tournament's semi-final against the most vocal anti-VQ crusader.
I have not used her since, because I find her horribly overpriced.

You seem to think that Illwinter have created the perfect game, perfect in all respects, in no need of tweaking/modding whatsover.

Certainly in no need of tweaking/modding prompted by the whine-du-jour of
clueless losers.

Ah yes, truly, ignorance is bliss!

I am sure that explains why you are so happy with yourself. But I prefer
finding my own happiness in winning. Once again, care to play a game so
that we can both indulge?