What Are the Drawbacks of High Misfortune?

[Ironhawk]

Thats a really interesting scale combination, baalz. Wouldnt have thought to use that - might give it a shot in my next game. How do you keep all your mages from dying?

In the past I've always used Order/Misfortune. Really you are only in danger for like the first 2-3 turns of the game and after that it pays off very well. And you get attacked by Bogus often which is, outside of the early game, a positive event since it nets you a lot of equipment.

Turmoil/Luck is nice in the early game when a big gold boost can almost double your economic power in a turn. But once your hit the event per turn limit, your bonus becomes static. This is a very serious flaw when playing in medium/large games because nations who took Order will have a strong relative advantage over you since thier income scales faster as thier empires grow!

[Zeldor]

Ironhawk:

You can get attacked by Bogus even in Luck 2-3

[Shovah32]

Zeldor said:
Ironhawk:

You can get attacked by Bogus even in Luck 2-3

Thought it is probably considered by the game to be a bad event, thus being much more rare in a luck 2-3 enviroment than under misfortune of a similar level.

[Sombre]

Although events are less common overall if you take order misfortune, so perhaps bogus is less common.

[Xietor]

In Alpaca, i took 3 order and luck and it worked out well. Also in a 4 player game i did the same. Both games turned out with good results.

In both games i got heroes early and often, and got many gem producing events. Not so many great items though.

[Humakty]

Bogus can be considered a good event only if you've got nothing else to do. When I get this event I'm often waging a defensive war against 1+ AIs, and you really can't deal with him with a secondary army.

I often take misfortune now, so as to pay for my growth as I play factions that are crippled by old age. (Ah fire magic...)It is true it is a real pain to have your lab/temple wipped out early on. Barbarian attacks on the capitol have never been a threat for me(they get trashed by 25+ PD), but I never play the monkeys and their (censored so as not to cause a riot) PD.

I think misf/order is a better bet than turmoil/luck, even if the best is to have all positive scales, which is possible if you don't need a strong bless.

[sector24]

I started an order 3 luck 3 game recently and another thing that really hurts these scales is slow dominion spread. For instance, let's say you defeat an order 3 misfortune 2 player. You had 10 provinces and you took 5 more for a total of 15. The problem is that 33% of your territory has misfortune rather than luck, so when you get a random event there it still ends up being a bad one. I get a lot of barbarian events in newly conquered territory before I get a chance to convert the scales. Since you're limited to 3 events/turn, you really have to try to flip the scales quickly if you want to max out your positive events.

At least this is how it seems to me. Can anyone confirm that the game randomly chooses the province first, then the event based on the scales in that province? I think luck would be significantly better if random events were weighted towards lucky provinces first.

[Baalz]

Ironhawk said:
Thats a really interesting scale combination, baalz. Wouldnt have thought to use that - might give it a shot in my next game. How do you keep all your mages from dying?

In the past I've always used Order/Misfortune. Really you are only in danger for like the first 2-3 turns of the game and after that it pays off very well. And you get attacked by Bogus often which is, outside of the early game, a positive event since it nets you a lot of equipment.

Turmoil/Luck is nice in the early game when a big gold boost can almost double your economic power in a turn. But once your hit the event per turn limit, your bonus becomes static. This is a very serious flaw when playing in medium/large games because nations who took Order will have a strong relative advantage over you since thier income scales faster as thier empires grow!

To be sure, I don't always take those scales, I very seldom take death scales when old age is an issue. For many nations though it's not.

Order is nice, to be sure, I don't think anyone will argue that. I do think it's a bit misleading though to just look at the gold value and say luck's advantage is static. Whats the value of getting a necromancer who starts casting dark knowledge? Without trying to pick a value that's arguably an exponential advantage as your death income grows over time. What's the value of losing the lab at your capital? I'm not talking about during the first few turns, I'm talking about at the point you've got a bunch of researchers and rituals being cast - again this value grows over time even assuming you didn't miss out on critical support for your military. How valuable is it to be able to prime the pump on site searching spells without having to alchemize - potentially from non-astral gems? What's the value of a national hero?

Luck is definitely *not* the most efficient way to gain gold, but gold alone does not win a game.