Tip: Looking for advice on site searching

[Saxon]

Well, I make 66% of 70% to be 46%. That is not bad for those indies. You can always trade or alchemize the gems you don't need, but it could well be worth it.

Thanks again Endo

[Edratman]

The best way to site search is a recurrent thread that I have followed for more than a year.

There has never been any consensus or decisive determination of the best technique because of the limitations that are the backbone of the game.

Everyone acknowledges that level 4 search finds all sites, in that path, which is preferable to lower level searches. The problem is that no nation has the wherewithal to check all the 8 paths (not counting blood) at level 4, either with manual search or site searching spells. Everyone has path limitations, gem limits, etc, which define boundries to searching abilities.

Thus I have concluded that the correct answer to site searching is to do the best you can with the available resources combining manual and site searching spells. If a province already has 4 sites, don't search it anymore. If you have searched at level 1, it is worthwhile to search again at level 2 to 4. If you have searched at level 2 or 3, a level 4 search is only practical if you have the resources available and no other pressing need for them.

Of course, if you have 2 or 3 mages with all 9-paths at level 4 or better, a manual search is recommended.

[vfb]

I hadn't played water nations much until recently, except for some subbing, and I think I've been pretty inefficient in my site searching.

From Edit's DB it looks like sites are pretty sparse in the oceans. No blood of course, and:

In Sea: Code:

---

Path    Highest level

----    -------------

B       None

HF      1

DN      2

AWES    3

---

In Deep Sea: Code:

---

Path    Highest level

----    -------------

BHA     None

FDN     1 *

W       2

ES      3



* According to DB, should be "none", but is at least 1.

---

I really should have done this about 20 turns ago .

Edit: Took a look at my game, and I think there are more deep sea sites than the DB suggests. Update coming soon...

[vfb]

The following sites data conflicts with games I'm in:

S456 Ancient Temple of the Deeps: H1, also exists in Deep Sea
S442 Kelp Forest: N0, also exists in Deep Sea
S443 Kelp Fortress: N1, also exists in Deep Sea

I'm not sure if there's any others.

[Edi]

I'd missed these comments, vfb, so sorry for the long delay in reply: With regard to locmasks, I must rely on information provided by other parties. I can go over the data provided by EricM for patch 3.15 and check the locmasks, because they may have been changed for those sea sites. I only checked the ones in the shortlist and some others, so there may be some errors left over.

The DB is generally accurate, but it is NOT infallible.

Not yet anyway...

[vfb]

Thanks! I didn't see any other sites besides these, that don't match the data in your DB.