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

[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.

[Torgon]

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.

[curtadams]

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]

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?

[curtadams]

Originally Posted by Torgon

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

There's no one change - you have to get down in the readme files. But in general, many spells had gem costs and research levels dropped, archers had stats cut and bows impaired, and cavalry and infantry are cheaper (especially cavalry).

[parone]

personally, i'd love to play a non-cbm game, since this is my first outing. but if it's a deal breaker, i'll certainly play either way

[Torgon]

Originally Posted by curtadams

There's no one change - you have to get down in the readme files. But in general, many spells had gem costs and research levels dropped, archers had stats cut and bows impaired, and cavalry and infantry are cheaper (especially cavalry).

Ahhh. I guess it's just a difference in wording. Its these types of changes I mean when I was refer to minor balance tweaks. Sure it changes some of the relative effectiveness of units and spells, but there its not really even on the same level as stuff like gem gens and hammers.

Originally Posted by curtadams

Although not without flaws, CBM is a substantial improvement over vanilla at all stages of the game.

I rather think it achieves a different balance, not necesarily a better one. And it splits the playerbase.

If the mod had stopped at a dozen changes moving from one system to another would be more manageable, but I can understand how there's been some kind of a snowball effect.

[Torgon]

Originally Posted by Wendigo_reloaded

I rather think it achieves a different balance, not necesarily a better one. And it splits the playerbase.

If the mod had stopped at a dozen changes moving from one system to another would be more manageable, but I can understand how there's been some kind of a snowball effect.

At least what I understand from my limited perspective is that Llamabeast is hoping to reach some kind of stability with it eventually. The big thing that hampered that were the major changes in the last few iterations.

Overall, I'm pretty much in agreement that its a much better balance. Read any of the strategies guides that are not CBM focused. Basically everything comes down to forge a boat load of gem gens, forge a bunch of hammers, get GoH or chalice, summon Tarts, win.

I think the bigger problem is not that there's a balance mod out there, but that these issues, which were pretty obviously issues, were not just addressed in the vanilla version of the game.