The next patch

[Peter Ebbesen]

Originally posted by Wendigo:

quote:

---

20: Clams= 10 Income= 15 Waste= 0 Store= 18 --> Produced 1 clams

I am with Jasper. I am far from impressed by the above numbers, and those are a 'best possible' scenario for an astral power: Construction research for clam forging + 1 dwarven hammer already forged available both from turn3, which is basically impossible.

---

Well, that is going too far.

Remember that THAT projection was based on ONLY using a starting income of 5 gems without using any gems gained through finding water or astral sites - which is a quite unlikely scenario; it just happens to be a scenario that is easy to calculate the results of. In other words, it was not the "best possible" scenario, it was the "best possible using only the gem income from your own capital" - which is a very different matter.

Anyone who goes for a dedicated clam of pearls strategy is very likely to get better than 5 astral and 0 water/round from ordinary sources within a dozen rounds or so, which kickstarts the process.

[ April 02, 2004, 14:36: Message edited by: Peter Ebbesen ]

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by Wendigo:
Even if it was, forfeiting the gem income from 20 turns (100 gems!) to get a +10 gem income is far from impressive. On standard settings I am pretty sure I could get a better income with half the investment by just casting a few search spells.

Who says you won't cast search spells? You must remember that water magic is essentially useless other than for quickness, so it's not a particularly big loss to convert all your water gems to astral ones. It does only take about 35 turns to get to 100 clams once you have a decent income in other gems, as that's exactly what I've done with R'Lyeh.

Even so, it's disputable that a clam strategy would be a better investment than an early casting of Voice of Tiamat on every sea: Sacrifice 10 gems for a 1 gem income, or 8 gems for a 2+ income?

No reason you can't do both. But once you've searched all your water provinces, there's no reason not to make clams.

[Wendigo]

Hey Peter, don't blame me for using your numbers!
Obviously ignoring extra gem income is a simplification, but it's good enough to evaluate returns in regards to investment anyway.

Graeme:

Who says you won't cast search spells? You must remember that water magic is essentially useless other than for quickness, so it's not a particularly big loss to convert all your water gems to astral ones.

Oportunity costs. Mages & gems used to do one cannot be used to do the other. So you gotta choose.

It does only take about 35 turns to get to 100 clams once you have a decent income in other gems, as that's exactly what I've done with R'Lyeh.

Could you elaborate on this? % magic sites? map? # opponents? who are you putting 100 clams on?
And most important of all: where Atlantis & Ermor in the game?

What kind of game are you playing that you can spend 750-1000 gems in items with no immediate return, without your military power resenting from it? Really, if you had such a surplus why didn't you just go for the game & start killing opponents?

Re clams vs Voice of Tiamat:

No reason you can't do both. But once you've searched all your water provinces, there's no reason not to make clams.

Opportunity costs of course. Even more important because when you delay clam forging you delay your Return On Investment from those clams.

I am not saying that clam-forging cannot work, rather that it applies to very specific game settings. It's obvious that strategies based on economy building are stronger the longer the game, tho I find some of the 'fixes' being suggested a bit radical.

Why don't you just play faster games? The same fun with less MM.

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by Wendigo:
Hey Peter, don't blame me for using your numbers!
Obviously ignoring extra gem income is a simplification, but it's good enough to evaluate returns in regards to investment anyway.

Not really. Any water gem income cuts the time to 100 (TO100) by a good 10 turns or so.

Graeme:
Oportunity costs. Mages & gems used to do one cannot be used to do the other. So you gotta choose.

But you can do both. With construction 6 it only takes a water 1 mage to build a clam, and those mages aren't that hard to come by. What else would you do with a water 2 mage?

Could you elaborate on this? % magic sites? map? # opponents? who are you putting 100 clams on?
And most important of all: where Atlantis & Ermor in the game?

50% magic sites, independents 6, Orania, 17 players. The clams go on star children who are researching.

What kind of game are you playing that you can spend 750-1000 gems in items with no immediate return, without your military power resenting from it? Really, if you had such a surplus why didn't you just go for the game & start killing opponents?

I didn't have that kind of surplus. I had an income of about 5 water gems per turn and 10 astral per turn. From turn 20 when I started, I had my 100 clams by turn 55. Whenever I needed gems quickly I just skipped one turn of clam production and had an easy 20 to 50 pearls to work with for that turn. I'm not sinking 750-1000 gems into the clams. I'm sinking about 150 water gems (useless for anything else), and about 300 astral pearls from site income. The rest of the gems are produced by the clams themselves. There's really nothing else that's worthwhile for a nation like R'lyeh to do with its water gems.

Opportunity costs of course. Even more important because when you delay clam forging you delay your Return On Investment from those clams.

You don't actually delay the ROI much at all, since any site based income makes the TO100 come 10's of turns faster.

I am not saying that clam-forging cannot work, rather that it applies to very specific game settings. It's obvious that strategies based on economy building are stronger the longer the game, tho I find some of the 'fixes' being suggested a bit radical.

Building clams is an geometric growth with time. This is something that very few other strategies can produce.

Why don't you just play faster games? The same fun with less MM.

I wasn't aware that a game that's in turn ~60 was a long game.

[Wendigo]

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
But you can do both.

If you can do both then you are swimming in gems & have a comfortable lead.

I didn't have that kind of surplus. I had an income of about 5 water gems per turn and 10 astral per turn. From turn 20 when I started, I had my 100 clams by turn 55.
...
I'm not sinking 750-1000 gems into the clams. I'm sinking about 150 water gems (useless for anything else), and about 300 astral pearls from site income.

450 gems, 300 of them being astrals is still a substantial amount. Just checked your numbers & they only seem to match if those gems are used from the very start (ie, you start with 30 clams in turn 21-22), so you are likely to have spent much more than your estimation.

Your experience seems to differ also from mine. By turn 20 I am often already at war or planning to, and form then on do not stop fighting until the end of the game.

From an outsider PoV Atlantis seems to have been particularly passive in your game, same with Ermor. By turn 20+ a number of land nations should also have developed the means to at least be able to raid seas, if not hold on them.

The rest of the gems are produced by the clams themselves. There's really nothing else that's worthwhile for a nation like R'lyeh to do with its water gems.

Debatable. Early on Voice of Tiamat gives better returns that clams. Later on Murdering winter, Wolven winter + a number of good summons are also an option. And that without considering battlefield usage.

I am also far from convinced that spending 15-20 astrals to start getting the returns 10 turns later is a good move.

I wasn't aware that a game that's in turn ~60 was a long game.

We obviously have different tastes on this.

edit- typo

[ April 02, 2004, 20:39: Message edited by: Wendigo ]

[Stormbinder]

Originally posted by Wendigo:

quote:

---

20: Clams= 10 Income= 15 Waste= 0 Store= 18 --> Produced 1 clams

is not present in the game.

Even so, it's disputable that a clam strategy would be a better investment than an early casting of Voice of Tiamat on every sea: Sacrifice 10 gems for a 1 gem income, or 8 gems for a 2+ income?

---

You are missing the point Wendigo - Voice of Tiamat has hard max limit - the total number of your provinces. Clams don't. As Graeme said it's geometrical progression.

[ April 02, 2004, 19:34: Message edited by: Stormbinder ]

[Wendigo]

Originally posted by Stormbinder:

You are missing the point Wendigo - Voice of Tiamat has hard max limit - the total number of your provinces. Clams don't. As Graeme said it's geometrical progression.

I am missing nothing.

It was argued that there was no better use for early water gems, so I just offered a better use.

As the game advances, it's less and less of an advantage to invest those waters in clams (as you will get less return, and there will be new options available).

You guys seem to defend that dumping huge amounts in clams is both necessary & compulsory to be able to compete. I have certainly won more than once without doing that, so I dispute this line of reasoning.

What I am saying is that this 'geometric growth' strategy only works in some very specific settings: big map, long game, water income, passive players, relative early invulnerability.

Nothing I have seen posted so far contradicts the above, and Graeme's example seems to rather confirm it. Additionally, forging clams is definitely not the only way to get 'free' gems/money/troops.

You might argue that it's a very cost effective one, and I would agree that it could indeed be some times, but I will tell you also that you maybe should consider putting some more care in the choice of settings for your next game, and be more agressive vs those hoarders.

[ April 02, 2004, 19:54: Message edited by: Wendigo ]