Back again after absence, polling interest for a MA (learning) game

Yskonyn · #1 February 11th, 2012, 04:14 AM

Hi guys!

How is everyone here? I am back at Dominions 3 after quite a long absence.
I have enjoyed setting up my previous games and I would like to fire off a new game soon.
It will be a MA game where ideally there would be a balance between the newer players with less experience and veterans.
The whole idea is to learn a bit more about the game, while playing against human opponents.

Perhaps it is a good idea to have the vets assigned a random faction, while the newer players can choose one they like?
This to balance the and early game ending tactics by the vets.

I would encourage asking questions on the forums about the game, although you will always have to weigh what consequences it might have for you in-game, regarding spoilers.
Still, first and foremost this would be a learning experience.

Of course still a loose draft, but we will narrow things down once there is some interest.

Cheers!

LoloMo · #2 February 11th, 2012, 08:25 AM

I would suggest the vets being assigned the weakest nation people agree on instead of randoms, as they will still probably roll over the newer players. Plus you might be able to better entice vets to join with this handicap.

Yskonyn · #3 February 11th, 2012, 01:24 PM

Yeah that's fine as well, of course.

parone · #4 February 11th, 2012, 02:40 PM

just got the game 3 days ago. have a good working knowledge, and would love to participate.

count me in. i certainly have plenty to learn. it's fine if there are non newbs. i have no illusions about winning, just want to have some fun!

Torgon · #5 February 11th, 2012, 06:16 PM

I'd be up for it as well. I've had the game for about a year, but my MP experience is limited.

Yskonyn · #6 February 11th, 2012, 07:01 PM

Thanks Torgon and Parone.
Ive had the game for about a year and a half as well. Hosted 2 mp games but got wiped in the first 20 or so turns on both games.
Almost no SP experience so I am still a noob as well.

For learning the game I would say we go WITHOUT CBM in this game. My vision is that you can only enjoy the changes that it brings if you first know what it actually changed.
Perhaps you dont even prefer CBM.
Worthy Heroes might be a good mod if people stand on playing with improved heroes as opposed to the vanilla setting, but I would prefer keeping it as stock as possible.

Torgon · #7 February 11th, 2012, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yskonyn

Thanks Torgon and Parone.
Ive had the game for about a year and a half as well. Hosted 2 mp games but got wiped in the first 20 or so turns on both games.
Almost no SP experience so I am still a noob as well.

For learning the game I would say we go WITHOUT CBM in this game. My vision is that you can only enjoy the changes that it brings if you first know what it actually changed.
Perhaps you dont even prefer CBM.
Worthy Heroes might be a good mod if people stand on playing with improved heroes as opposed to the vanilla setting, but I would prefer keeping it as stock as possible.

I've actually only played CBM games. In general I'm somewhat in favor of it for several reasons.

1. It's fairly standard. I just don't see many games (at least on the this forum or the z7 forum) that don't use it in some way. If you're going to learn, you might as well learn what everyone else is using. Why learn how to spam gem gens when you're never going to spam gem gens outside of this game?

2. Except for a couple big things, its not that dramatic of a departure from vanilla. Most of the changes are balance tweaks to cost, spell requirements, a couple extra units or unit buffs here or there.

3. The big changes that it does make, removal of gem gens and removal of hammers, are good changes.

4. It makes some significant improvements to some nations that just aren't viable choices in Vanilla. There are a few that may be a little over the top now (Argatha and MA Ulm seem to be good examples), but they're the exceptions.

5. Its not like vanilla is any easier to learn than CBM. i.e. its not that much better documented (lets be honest, the manual as a reference is pretty bad). We could just as easily say that learning CBM prepares you for playing a vanilla game. So given 1, 2, 3, and 4 I'd prefer going for CBM, but that's just me.

legowarrior · #8 February 11th, 2012, 07:35 PM

If you are starting a cbm game, I'd love to get on with it, but maybe not quite yet. I just started a non cbm game, and I think I'd like to stagger it so that I don't have to games in the same stage of the game.

curtadams · #9 February 11th, 2012, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torgon

I've actually only played CBM games. In general I'm somewhat in favor of it for several reasons.

1. It's fairly standard. I just don't see many games (at least on the this forum or the z7 forum) that don't use it in some way. If you're going to learn, you might as well learn what everyone else is using. Why learn how to spam gem gens when you're never going to spam gem gens outside of this game?

2. Except for a couple big things, its not that dramatic of a departure from vanilla. Most of the changes are balance tweaks to cost, spell requirements, a couple extra units or unit buffs here or there.

3. The big changes that it does make, removal of gem gens and removal of hammers, are good changes.

4. It makes some significant improvements to some nations that just aren't viable choices in Vanilla. There are a few that may be a little over the top now (Argatha and MA Ulm seem to be good examples), but they're the exceptions.

5. Its not like vanilla is any easier to learn than CBM. i.e. its not that much better documented (lets be honest, the manual as a reference is pretty bad). We could just as easily say that learning CBM prepares you for playing a vanilla game. So given 1, 2, 3, and 4 I'd prefer going for CBM, but that's just me.

I mostly agree, except that I think CBM *does* make big differences, and good ones. I think that the point at which magic starts making a big difference comes much earlier in the game. So there's more flavor early on. CBM also adjusted the infantry/archery/cavalry balance so archery is not overwhelming in large armies. Finally, the scales are better balanced, particularly Order/Misfortune vs. Turmoil/Luck.

Although not without flaws, CBM is a substantial improvement over vanilla at all stages of the game. At the same time, there's enough to the game that it will take you a long time to to exhaust the variety. So go ahead, enjoy the good stuff, there's plenty of it.

Torgon · #10 February 11th, 2012, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by curtadams

I mostly agree, except that I think CBM *does* make big differences, and good ones. I think that the point at which magic starts making a big difference comes much earlier in the game. So there's more flavor early on. CBM also adjusted the infantry/archery/cavalry balance so archery is not overwhelming in large armies.

I must confess my ignorance. What changes in CBM cause these effects?