Exploit question

[fantasma]

but what about late game with limited gems? You'd probably see dragged out stalemates until somebody lucks in keeping a game-winning global up? Everybody is forced to invest in blood? Castling every province to keep the defense bonus and get spawning summons everywhere?

I don't see any chance to end the game unless there is something completely unbalancing in which you have to invest initially but that develops into an unbeatable juggernaught.

To my - limited - experience clams are competing for much needed N gems, so you give up performance mid-game to achieve the effect. If it were that they cost 15N5W or (15N15W for more difficult path requirements) the initial investment is steep enough so that you have to chose to thug out another guy or forge a clam; ditch the earlier parts of a game just to get to the requirements for eventually snowballing returns.

Some players will do at the risk of getting eliminated early, some will not and might get rolled over in the end. But that is a strategic choice.

To sum it up, what do you think should the end game look like and by what means do you think one should decide the winner?

[Mardagg]

[quote=fantasma;723253]but what about late game with limited gems? You'd probably see dragged out stalemates until somebody lucks in keeping a game-winning global up? Everybody is forced to invest in blood? Castling every province to keep the defense bonus and get spawning summons everywhere?

QUOTE]

You would see....diversity!

And about limited gems...e.g. 200 gems per turn should be still enough for lot of end game action+ you can play bigger maps or increase magic sites if you want more.

-Games may last longer on average,but since the turns take less time to play without microing gem gens,thats ok imo.
-Blood isnt nearly as game breaking as having say 300+astral income per turn.Skipping Blood,or only going very small into it, is perfectly viable imo.Also ,as i said earlier,if more players compete for Blood,Blood becomes weaker bc of the limited summons+you cant alchemize it.
-Game winning globals are very tough to cast without clams.
You would risk to be a lot behind in other areas to do that.
Dont forget,u can still alchemize your other gems for astral if you have to dispel that nasty global,the opponent just put up.
-tartarian commanders will be fewer in numbers,bc wishing for the chalice will be tough,and GoH will only be possible for good nature nations.
-National troops will be more useful in end game since everyone has less powerful magic troops.
-Expansion will probably be more important right from the start,since more provinces=more gems.
Waging war early will become more profitable again,but turtling still remains an option because of superior research.
-Players losing a war and wishing for armageddon before going AI wont be seen.

[Belac]

Originally Posted by Mardagg

You would see....diversity!

And about limited gems...e.g. 200 gems per turn should be still enough for lot of end game action+ you can play bigger maps or increase magic sites if you want more.

-Games may last longer on average,but since the turns take less time to play without microing gem gens,thats ok imo.
-Blood isnt nearly as game breaking as having say 300+astral income per turn.Skipping Blood,or only going very small into it, is perfectly viable imo.Also ,as i said earlier,if more players compete for Blood,Blood becomes weaker bc of the limited summons+you cant alchemize it.
-Game winning globals are very tough to cast without clams.
You would risk to be a lot behind in other areas to do that.
Dont forget,u can still alchemize your other gems for astral if you have to dispel that nasty global,the opponent just put up.
-tartarian commanders will be fewer in numbers,bc wishing for the chalice will be tough,and GoH will only be possible for good nature nations.
-National troops will be more useful in end game since everyone has less powerful magic troops.
-Expansion will probably be more important right from the start,since more provinces=more gems.
Waging war early will become more profitable again,but turtling still remains an option because of superior research.
-Players losing a war and wishing for armageddon before going AI wont be seen.

That sounds awesome, actually. Late-game would be more different for each nation, and nations wouldn't be locked into all the same strategies.