Will Vanheim Ever Become Spayed?

[NTJedi]

Edi said:
Perhaps if you had gone to any kind of school that taught manners you'd be able to refrain from using that bloody rolleyes icon every time somebody disagrees with you. It gives the impression of you having your nose stuck up in the air so high that it rains INTO your nostrils. So don't be surprised that you get a response in kind.

We could both throw endless insults yet it doesn't provide any benefit to the topic of discussion. The rolleyes icon is used when someone cannot keep the conversation civilized and that's the only reason. I really do hope you can control your attitude so the discussion can be more productive.

Edi said:
See what Graeme posted. As well, you still refuse to address the distinction between "strong" and "ridiculously lopsided". Of course there are stronger and weaker nations, just as there were in Dom1 and Dom2, but that does not mean that some have to be orders of magnitude above others. You do understand the concept "order of magnitude", I hope?

As mentioned earlier there are LOTS of nations(over fifty) so even if Vanheim and Helheim are "very strong" there's plenty of other options for nations to choose. I could understand if the game only had about 5 nations, but that's not the case. Order of magnitude would be relevant if Vanheim and Helheim had to exist in every game. It's not mandatory for these nations to play in every game which removes them as a variable when not in a game.
The purpose of having some "very strong" nations serves multiple purposes. First newbies reading the forums and questioning their skills will more likely join a game knowing their first game is playing a very strong nation. Second in singleplayer games many gamers enjoy playing the very strong nations and as their experience grows they enjoy playing against the very strong nations. Third whether its singleplayer or multiplayer winning a game against a "very strong" vanheim is more rewarding than winning a game against a "nerfed" vanheim because the greater the challenge the greater the reward. And a fourth reason is for mapmakers which desire a few of the nations to be "very strong" allowing more options for creating maps. Even now I'm developing a map where the SP gamer will be playing the "very strong" Vanheim and going up against computer opponents which will be given great advantages which should provide some great battles.

Edi said:
Then they can either mod them or play with self-imposed handicaps such as not maxing out everything as per competitive MP style play.

Here you're suggesting a change so others have to do the modding or self-imposed handicaps instead of you accepting the game in its current state or making the adjustments yourself.

Edi said:
Provided they know which nations are the strongest and that they are not already taken. See Graeme's point again. New players do not need excessive security guarantees, they just need a decent chance and the more experienced people giving them a few breaks instead of ruthlessly exploiting every mistake they see the newbie making.

In most cases the newbies have to be on the forums to find the multiplayer games. As a result they will be curious enough to skim the bug thread and more popular topics such as this one.

Edi said:
There's no balance problem what with certain natiuons being ridiculously stronger than others because there's a lot of nations total. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
In case you aren't familiar with logic, that's a non sequitur.

There is no problem with balance when these nations don't have to exist in every game. I would agree with your balance concern if these very strong nations absolutely were part of every game, but there presence in the game is not mandatory. The host can easily remove them as an option using the #allowedplayer command.

Edi said:As Graeme said, the MP aspect is one of the most important aspects of the game and a driving force behind the community. Hence things that detract from it, such as obvious balance problems that are not within the normal variation, are bad for the game and for the community. Why the hell do you think the CB mods were such a big hit with Dom2? They removed the most glaring problems while maintaining the game as it was meant to play. This issue is no bloody different.

First the MP aspect is not the only part of the game and those non-MP gamers must be considered as well. If the developers wanted a MP only game then there would be no AI opponents. For the greatest success of the game it must grow with consideration to both MP gamers and SP gamers. And having Vanheim and Helheim as very powerful when over fifty nations exist will not hurt the MP gaming sessions when the host can easily remove them as an option.

Edi said:Yeah. What you've been saying all along. It's perfectly all right as long as you exclude these strong ones, which detracts from the game far more than nerfing them enough that they'd still be strong instead of ridiculously powerful.

As I recall, Dom2 experienced a resurgence after the CB mods because the most glaring issues of ridiculous lopsidedness were fixed in those. So why the hell should we not have it addressed now while Dom3 is still young?

Because Dominions is not a MP only community... changes to the game must consider those which play SP only, MP with AI opponents, and MP only.

Edi said:Perhaps I'm not as interested in making snide remarks from behind a false veneer of mock-politeness as you are. I'm treating you in just the manner you deserve and as you might have noticed, I've been quite the opposite of rude to others here. If I think something is a stupid idea or at least not well thought out, I'll say so directly. Just as I did when I first called bull**** on your opinion and you chose to try to put words in mouth to make it seem as if I was advocating a far different position. That goes beyond being just rude, it shows you to be a deliberately dishonest person so I don't see why I should be kissing your rear and nodding sagely to the tune of your droning.

Sorry you view my posts in such a negative manner. Yet as I mentioned earlier you're looking at this from a MP only view... which is why you don't understand the reasons I've provided.

Edi said:
So, in addition to me busting my arse creating documentation that will enable better modding and mapmaking, I should also go and do the specific mods to address an issue that the majority here see as a problem just so that you can sit on your backside and pontificate without ever providing any kind of evidence, calculations, or even logically consistent reasoning for your positions?

Why don't you go back to playing AoW:SM and polluting the AoW Heaven forums? You've been so bent on turning this game to a micromanagement hell what with all the suggestions down the years that I'm inclined to give actual bull**** far more value than your opinion. After all, it can be used for fertilizer where as your views amount to little more than hot air most of the time.

Hopefully the post from Kristoffer will water down your tainted mind. I've listed many reasons above for all ways the game can be played and why Vanheim and Helheim should not be nerfed. All your reasons revolve around MP only games. Changes to the game must consider those which play SP only, MP with AI opponents, and MP only.

[Gandalf Parker]

Its definetly a workable strategy. What I see is that Vanheim/Helheim are not imbalanced. They ARE the balance. Against certain nations and certain strategies. This is a variation on other threads Ive seen about Ermor, or Ulm, or Jotunheim, etc etc.

Dominions does not balance nation to nation. It balances by rock-paper-scissors. So a nation is not imbalanced if its extremely difficult to beat on a certain map size with certain game settings when facing certain nations who are playing a certain way. (altho, the devs will certainly examine that and see if a tweak might improve one type of gameplay without affecting others)

[Aseth]

Gandalf Parker said:
Its definetly a workable strategy. What I see is that Vanheim/Helheim are not imbalanced. They ARE the balance. Against certain nations and certain strategies. This is a variation on other threads Ive seen about Ermor, or Ulm, or Jotunheim, etc etc.

Dominions does not balance nation to nation. It balances by rock-paper-scissors. So a nation is not imbalanced if its extremely difficult to beat on a certain map size with certain game settings when facing certain nations who are playing a certain way. (altho, the devs will certainly examine that and see if a tweak might improve one type of gameplay without affecting others)

yep, that`s exactly what I mean, but can`t tell because of lack skills in English

[NickW]

Gandalf Parker said:
Its definetly a workable strategy. What I see is that Vanheim/Helheim are not imbalanced. They ARE the balance. Against certain nations and certain strategies. This is a variation on other threads Ive seen about Ermor, or Ulm, or Jotunheim, etc etc.

I'm sorry, but are you doing any MP play at all? That statement seems to be completely unsupportable. Dual Blessed Van/Hel against anyone else in an MP game is going to go in favor of the Van/Hel sacreds assuming all else equal. Unless there is vastly unequal skill involved, or third party interference from another nation, the Vans/Hels are almost a lock to win.

Obviously there are a few counter strategies that work but they all revolve around being very specific nations and playing with very specific anti-Van strategies.

If the choice is between playing only a limited list of nations/strategies or losing, then the game is sadly broken.

I'd like to think I'm overlooking some obvious F9/W9 Van counter but I don't I am. Most nations simply can't beat the F9/W9 Vans without having a lot of research and being able to spend more significantly more resources defeating the Vans than the Vans themselves cost.

Gandalf Parker said:
Dominions does not balance nation to nation. It balances by rock-paper-scissors. So a nation is not imbalanced if its extremely difficult to beat on a certain map size with certain game settings when facing certain nations who are playing a certain way. (altho, the devs will certainly examine that and see if a tweak might improve one type of gameplay without affecting others)

I'd generally agree with that statement, but the imbalances that do exist and have long existed are not severe ones. Some nations didn't match up well with others but that just meant having to use clever tactics or get allies or simply be bigger/richer before engaging X with Y.

The Van/Hel dual bless thing is a bit different. If you want to start charting out all the possible scenarios and all the possible situations Van/Hel can face the sad fact is they should win almost all of them, all else being equal in terms of player skill.

[DrPraetorious]

Nerfing pisses me off.

Let's compare two sorts of cardboard crack^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcollectible trading car d games: Magic the Gathering and Shadowfist.

MtG tried to rebalance the cards by nerfing everything. The result is a very flat game with no cool and powerful stuff in it, because if anything was any good it might be unbalancing.

Shadowfist, on the other hand, starts with more robust underlying mechanics, and then rebalances cards by making them *better*, not worse. As a result, shadowfist is a very well balanced game with lots of cards that do awesomely powerful stuff.

It is absolutely untrue, and I think demonstrated by various posts, that it is impossible to beat *heim. It may be true - and I admit that I haven't played every nation - that *some* nations have no viable strategy to oppose vanheim, particularly in the early game.

If that is the case - the question becomes, what can we add to those nations that would enable them to oppose vanheim more effectively, without changing them beyond recognition? Note that if you have a 33% chance of repulsing the rush, you are mounting effective opposition, especially if you can cause significant losses even in defeat.

So, in the *modders* forum, I have included a "which nations need bennies" thread, where I discuss this in some detail.

http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/thr...b=5&o=&fpart=1

[Graeme Dice]

NTJedi said:
I really do hope you can control your attitude so the discussion can be more productive.

And I also really hope you learn to stop making snide remarks and destroying useful threads with your complete inability to change your mind. I really wish that the mosas would have banned you years ago so that you wouldn't continue to stink up threads with your complete inability to reason.

The purpose of having some "very strong" nations serves multiple purposes.

How about you prove it by doing something other than repeating the same incorrect statements.

First newbies reading the forums and questioning their skills will more likely join a game knowing their first game is playing a very strong nation.

Really? Where's your evidence for this?

Second in singleplayer games many gamers enjoy playing the very strong nations and as their experience grows they enjoy playing against the very strong nations.

I see, they enjoy demolishing the AI without having to admit to themselves that they are cheating.

Third whether its singleplayer or multiplayer winning a game against a "very strong" vanheim is more rewarding than winning a game against a "nerfed" vanheim because the greater the challenge the greater the reward.

What's rewarding is playing a properly balanced game, not one where a single nation comes to the forefront in every single game.

And a fourth reason is for mapmakers which desire a few of the nations to be "very strong" allowing more options for creating maps.

Then the mapmaker can use mods, you know, just like you've suggested the multiplayer players do.

Even now I'm developing a map where the SP gamer will be playing the "very strong" Vanheim and going up against computer opponents which will be given great advantages which should provide some great battles.

That's unlikely. The AI isn't capable of defeating a competent player unless you give it enough advantages to defeat them in the first 20 turns through sheer swarming.

There is no problem with balance when these nations don't have to exist in every game. I would agree with your balance concern if these very strong nations absolutely were part of every game, but there presence in the game is not mandatory.

I see, so we're supposed to use house rules to limit multiplayer games, which are the entire point of Dominions, so that those people who want to demolish the AI by playing F9W9 Helheim can still do so.

First the MP aspect is not the only part of the game and those non-MP gamers must be considered as well.

The SP game comes in at a distant second to the quality of the MP game.

And having Vanheim and Helheim as very powerful when over fifty nations exist will not hurt the MP gaming sessions when the host can easily remove them as an option.

Once again you repeat your asinine assertion that the game isn't hurt by removing nations from the game. Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

Because Dominions is not a MP only community... changes to the game must consider those which play SP only, MP with AI opponents, and MP only.

Why are you personally threatened by the thought that a ridiculously overpowered nation might be weakened?

I've listed many reasons above for all ways the game can be played and why Vanheim and Helheim should not be nerfed.

What you've actually done is repeat your unsupported assertions over and over again, but then, you're never been smart enough to do anything else. You're almost as useless in this forum as Gandalf is.

All your reasons revolve around MP only games.

That's because the MP game is by far the most important when balancing the game. SP balance doesn't matter one bit.

[Graeme Dice]

NickW said:
I'm sorry, but are you doing any MP play at all? That statement seems to be completely unsupportable.

He doesn't and it is. Gandalf approaches every single post in this forum from the fanboy position that the game is perfect in whatever form the devs have currently built it and that any problems people have are problems with the people, not the game.

[Cerlin]

While I did start another post about Helheim, I thought I might post here as well after reading all 8 pages :O

First I agree that van/hel are STRONG but I never yelled Nerf I just asked for a tactic to beat them, if these are hard to find they should still exist. Dont wave the nerf bat too widely please, just give us a new spell or something.

On tactics that can hold off or beat hel/van I think I may have found a passable one. Im playing a Single player/hotseat game with a friend and I am Agartha. Our world has both Van and Hel and the only thing that really works is in fact blade storm (It does hit more often than not but takes a lot of tries) and turtling in forts. I am able to repair the walls faster than they can take them and this has enabled me to stall them on a few forts and expand away from them and into the oceans, which allow me to raid without losing many guys or being chased down. It is tough but works somewhat. My friend is Bandar Log and was able after some initial losses to use the magical and horde troops they get to beat Van, which shocked me as I suffed under Hel.

Lets do less bashing and more what we can do to fix or deal with this, please?

[Twan]

I think it's illogical to have to make mods for so obvious balance fixes.

Most MP games don't use the mods with the new nations players have created because they may be unbalanced, and many even don't use worthy heroes. Cbmod won't be as popular as in Dom2 as it would make the very well done dom3 manual obsolete.

The vanilla game *is* and should be the default MP setting when mods of all kinds are mostly a thing for SP.

So I vote adjust glamour / **heim nations in the official vanilla game, then allow to unnerf them (or not) via a mod for the minority of SP players that would do so (personnally even in SP I can't find the interest of overpowered nations, they force me to chose all my opponents instead of letting them be random if I play at high difficulty levels -try playing against an impossible AI with glamour units and compare with any other nation-).

[NTJedi]

Gandalf Parker said:
Its definetly a workable strategy. What I see is that Vanheim/Helheim are not imbalanced. They ARE the balance. Against certain nations and certain strategies. This is a variation on other threads Ive seen about Ermor, or Ulm, or Jotunheim, etc etc.

I agree... I remember all the threads about the dreaded Ermor in dominions_2. In my opinion this adds nice variety into the game as players are challenged to improve strategies. During blitz games Vanheim/Helheim is too much, yet these nations can be modded or removed using the #allowedplayer command.