Is it just me or is Hellheim troops way to strong?

[Gandalf Parker]

Most of the "problems" with Vanheim seem to be problems going head to head. Most of the answers to it seem to be defense, magic, stealth, etc. If the same tactics are being used then there will always be a "usually wins". I wouldnt want all nations to be balanced to where army-vs-army is the designing factor. The nations I most like to play do their "balancing" by using othr tactics than just my army is bigger than your army.

[Meglobob]

Vanheim/Hellheim are not out of balance. They are simply very, very strong nations early in the game or on small maps.

From midgame onwards those nations shrivel up and die rather easily.

Its all been discussed before and its always players who are fairly new to the game who complain. Look on defeating those nations as a challenge.

Neither nation has come anywhere near winning any MP I have played in and I have played alot. Those games are on 15 prov/player maps. Small 1 on 1 blitz games is a different story and Vanheim/Hellheim walk over most other nations but I do not play those so no problem for me.

[Teraswaerto]

Meglobob said:
Vanheim/Hellheim are not out of balance. They are simply very, very strong nations early in the game or on small maps.

From midgame onwards those nations shrivel up and die rather easily.

I don't know why for example EA Vanheim would suck at mid or end game. Their magics are not bad. Air and Earth. Granted, they are capital only, but that doesn't make their magic power weak, and the troops are still deadly as raiders even if they can be beaten by high research magics.

It proves nothing that they have won no MP games we know of. There are so many variables at play there.

[Meglobob]

Teraswaerto said:

I don't know why for example EA Vanheim would suck at mid or end game. Their magics are not bad. Air and Earth. Granted, they are capital only, but that doesn't make their magic power weak, and the troops are still deadly as raiders even if they can be beaten by high research magics.

It proves nothing that they have won no MP games we know of. There are so many variables at play there.

Teraswaerto here is Tyrants MP game winners so far, its really the only concrete evidence we after go about the balance of nations:-

.5 for joint win.

EA-
Caelum- 1
Sauromatia- 1
Tien Chi 1

MA-
Pythium 1
Ulm .5
Machaka .5
Man .5
Ermor 1
Vanheim 1
Jotunheim 1
Pangaea 1

LA-
Argatha 1
Mictlan 1

As you can see Hellheim and Vanheim have NO WINS in EA and 1 Vanheim win in MA. If Hellheim/Vanheim really are unbalanced they would be clocking up more wins.

[BigDisAwesome]

If Hellheim/Vanheim really are unbalanced they would be clocking up more wins.

Or all of these people that are arguing that they're overpowered could be teaming up on them in MP.

[Meglobob]

BigDisAwesome said:

Or all of these people that are arguing that they're overpowered could be teaming up on them in MP.

T'ien Ch'i in a EA game took out Helheim pretty much 1 on 1 and Helheim was played by a very, very good player but so was T'ien Ch'i...

I believe Atlantis in EA can eat Hellheim and Vanheim for breakfast, played correctly. Also EA Caelum can eat Hellheim/Vanheim for a midday snack played correctly. Also heavily blessed Mictlan nation can stand upto them (which how everyone usually plays Mictlan) and Nelfelheim, Abysia can also stomp Hellheim/Vanheim. So where's the balance problem?

Hellheim/Vanheim really are SOOOO overrated its untrue.

[Gandalf Parker]

Meglobob said:

T'ien Ch'i in a EA game took out Helheim pretty much 1 on 1 and Helheim was played by a very, very good player but so was T'ien Ch'i...

I believe Atlantis in EA can eat Hellheim and Vanheim for breakfast, played correctly. Also EA Caelum can eat Hellheim/Vanheim for a midday snack played correctly. Also heavily blessed Mictlan nation can stand upto them (which how everyone usually plays Mictlan) and Nelfelheim, Abysia can also stomp Hellheim/Vanheim. So where's the balance problem?

Hellheim/Vanheim really are SOOOO overrated its untrue.

I think part of it is that Vanheim's abilities make it easy to make use of them without having to play Vanheim well. The fact that it can be beaten by people playing the others well actually seems to be part of the complaint from what Ive seen. That is an imballance apparently. That it takes a good Tien Chi player to beat a bad Vanheim player.

But I agree. I have always felt that anyone playing the right nation for them will do well.

[thejeff]

Except that they tend to get ganged up, since they're perceived as unbalanced.

And given the perception of early game strength and late game weakness, I'm not certain, as I said above, that a nation that bumps off 2-3 neighbors and then is brought down when its strengths no longer apply is really balanced.

Finally, and somewhat tongue in cheek, that's not a statistically significant sample. Given the number of nations, even if Vanheim was twice as likely to win as any other nation, the observed distribution would not be unlikely.

[Gandalf Parker]

thejeff said:
Except that they tend to get ganged up, since they're perceived as unbalanced.

And given the perception of early game strength and late game weakness, I'm not certain, as I said above, that a nation that bumps off 2-3 neighbors and then is brought down when its strengths no longer apply is really balanced.

Finally, and somewhat tongue in cheek, that's not a statistically significant sample. Given the number of nations, even if Vanheim was twice as likely to win as any other nation, the observed distribution would not be unlikely.

Again, if it was always one then it would be a balance problem. But I see the same situation plagueing other nations. Advanced players tend to know what maps and victory conditions mean everyone-gang-up-on Ermor, Ulm, Rylieh, Arcos, Ctis, etc etc.

No matter what map size or victory condition or game settings, if its always the same then there will ALWAYS be someone that has an advantage and must be taken out first. Venheim seems to be it for small maps (not tiny ones) and about 4 players. A blitz game. In a game like that, if someone takes Vanheim then hit them first. Dont try to get it changed so that Vanheim is ruined in all the other games (and you simply end up with a new nation who is usually a problem)

[calmon]

Meglobob said:

Teraswaerto here is Tyrants MP game winners so far, its really the only concrete evidence we after go about the balance of nations:-

.5 for joint win.

EA-
Caelum- 1
Sauromatia- 1
Tien Chi 1

MA-
Pythium 1
Ulm .5
Machaka .5
Man .5
Ermor 1
Vanheim 1
Jotunheim 1
Pangaea 1

LA-
Argatha 1
Mictlan 1

As you can see Hellheim and Vanheim have NO WINS in EA and 1 Vanheim win in MA. If Hellheim/Vanheim really are unbalanced they would be clocking up more wins.

Sorry but this states says who win the game but not how! It says nothing about alliances of several players to defeat one nation or equal things.

I never played vanheim/helheim in a mp game but i've some good tactics in mind with the glamour stealth troops. In my mp games i've defeated vanheim twice but the players used the vans as a simple (very strong) combat unit. They missed the point that this things are the best national stealth troops.