Overlords - Game Thread. (playing)

[rdonj]

Originally Posted by Squirrelloid

The whole point to the banners is they aren't limited. But you do have diminishing returns - the more you have, the lower the marginal value of the *next* one. So there's some logical point at which you stop making them. And every one is some number of gems you aren't spending on other uses. I don't see a need for a hard limit.

The main thing is I don't want overlords to be able to field too many armies early in the game, because I'm pretty sure that would just lead to them crushing everyone. Currently I can think of two ways to deal with this. 1) You can build one banner for each x time that has passed, or 2) Make these banners construction 4 or 6 so you can't make them right away.

Anyway, I'm not sure I'm doing this yet to begin with.

[Squirrelloid]

Hoplo: its a sites 20 game. 15 gems is maybe an overlord's per turn gem income at the start. That's a significant expenditure of resources.

50 gems is just obscene. Its unplayably obscene. For 50 gems you can get a RoW (with hammer) or your choice of 2 good artifacts (like the chalice and the scepter of dark regency, both with a hammer).

Consider that overlords got something on the order of +10gems/turn advantage. Now, without considering the disadvantages of that gem income being spread around, you're basically saying that for each extra attack they get to make they have to spend 1/2 a year's 'bonus' gem income. Now consider that Eriu or Vanheim or Jotunheim can produce multiple thugs each turn by year 2, and probably forge sufficient gear for all of them in the same time frame by year 3. Basically, severely limited attacks means the overlord loses any raiding war instantly.

Really, 25 gems is probably too much, but anything higher than that is certainly out of the question.

It absolutely has to be an item, so teleport/cloud trapeze raiding is possible.

Making them require Constr 4 is certainly reasonable - Overlords wouldn't need them early.

Namad's proposal doesn't increase attacks fast enough unless its on an exponential scale (+1 year 2, +2 more year 3, +4 more year 4, etc...), and even then it might need to be every 6 months by year 4.

Basically, there's a fundamental disconnect between how the game is actually played and how people seem to imagine its played. How the game is actually played involves potentially dozens of attacks by year 5 or 6 in a single turn.

Consider VC3, which is on turn 52 (mid year 5). The game leaders have ~40+ provinces each. If I can't make at least 20 attacks on turn 1 of the war against one of them, its not worth starting the war, and a more reasonable estimate is 25-30. Why? Because if I don't I will not inflict sufficient damage to make victory likely, and will probably be facing a similar size retaliation.

Now imagine I was an Overlord attacking a normal in that situation. I can make an anemic 6 attacks based on Namad's theory, or *maybe* that many based on Hoplosternum's gem cost (VC3 has a normal sites setting, and I maybe could have bought 4 standards at 50 gems and have been reasonable under those settings. Sites 20 would involve fewer gems...). Then my target retaliates with 25 attacks, my empire is halved in size, and the war more or less continues in that vein until I inevitably lose.

[Baalz]

Yeah, I don't think the people playing normals really understand how handicapped overlords are. Just consider the fact that as the nominal leading overlord I would not be at that much of an advantage in a no holds barred fight with Vanheim right now other than the natural water defense advantage R'yleh always has. There is effectively no way for me to do anything to him whatsoever (good luck pushing my dominion into that blood sacrifice) - other than loom ominously ready to squish an army that goes for TC's cap. Same thing Ashdod just realized against Ermor. The way the game is set up it only makes sense for overlords to attack other overlords, and couterintuitively be at the mercy of a normal ally. The way the restrictions are work fine for the early game, but as Squirloid illustrates they're utterly crippling for late game fights.

[namad]

the idea I was having is that if the overlords are allowed to attack any indies any time they'll expand 2or3 as fast as they did in this game which was already fairly fast....


if you can only attack 6provinces a turn when you want to attack 18-24in one turn maybe that isn't so bad if you are 300% as strong as your enemy... i mean if we end up saying overlords can attack up to 24provinces per turn on turn 50 then they basically have totally unrestricted abilities to attack, and as such why did they bother being called an overlord and why did they get any advantages at all?

I guess you are saying you'd rather pay a high price for each additional army so that in theory you have the option to attack more per turn even if in practice it works out to the same or less than a fixed per year increase?

maybe overlords could get 1extra attack per year and one extra attack per vassal? encouraging them to get vassals and representing the vassal's logistical advantage to the overlord? i dunno.... we could just play a game without overlords :-p

[rdonj]

Btw, I have gone ahead and made an overlords 2 discussion thread, so for the future please try to keep such comments to the other thread.

Thread is located here.

[Squirrelloid]

Oh, i see, Vanheim isn't killing me because you're being ominous. Does anyone mind if I set AI? I mean, I can still be annoying, but my effective income is *30*/trn, my gem income is a trickle, and there's no way those mages are getting me out of this mess on their own.

[LumenPlacidum]

Originally Posted by Squirrelloid

Oh, i see, Vanheim isn't killing me because you're being ominous. Does anyone mind if I set AI? I mean, I can still be annoying, but my effective income is *30*/trn, my gem income is a trickle, and there's no way those mages are getting me out of this mess on their own.

Don't see why not... Machaka's now AI

[Baalz]

Nah, I'm gonna roll onto your cap very shortly and put you out of your misery (or at least try to), so you won't have an indefinite wait for a last ditch fight. Probably better to script something nasty in the castle and stale than switch AI and let me pick apart the last of the defenders as the AI attacks out.

[Lingchih]

I don't see any way an Overlord is winning this game now. Hell, I'm doing great, but I can't bust out anywhere. I'll continue to play though. It would be cheesy of me to bow out, while I have such stupendous forces.

[namad]

anyone want to trade me gems? I have F/S in abundance and I need all other types in various quantities...