SCs other than the vq

[PvK]

How about these ideas?

* Fighting fire with fires. Vampire Lords (?) seem similar but a bit better than VQ's. They also can summon vampires. This is a blood spell, or national spell for Black Forest Ulm. So... if I am BF Ulm or my pretender or national mages have some blood power, at least by mid game once I can cast summon some Vampire Lords, I am thinking the solitary VQ is going to be in trouble, no?

* Priest army. How ofter does a Holy-2 Banish spell hurt a VQ? Even if never, suppose I have some potential vampire-defeating units of some other type. I put them with an army as bait for the VQ to come try to get me, near the edge of her dominion. The surprise is, my mob of priests is that turn Preaching. If I have them, I have Skeptics, Inquisitors, or dominion-draining items in the army. Result: VQ arrives, gets killed, and oops - her dominion was unexpectedly sucked dry in the same turn. So no ressurrection. Or does the sequence of play not allow this to work?

PvK

[ May 05, 2004, 00:17: Message edited by: PvK ]

Originally posted by PvK:
How about these ideas?

* Fighting fire with fires. Vampire Lords (?) seem similar but a bit better than VQ's. They also can summon vampires. This is a blood spell, or national spell for Black Forest Ulm. So... if I am BF Ulm or my pretender or national mages have some blood power, at least by mid game once I can cast summon some Vampire Lords, I am thinking the solitary VQ is going to be in trouble, no?

The factors here are that Vampire Lords don't start with magic in the right spheres. I'm pretty sure every "VQ is overpowered OMG!" debater will mention that you need a few key magics to really make the VQ shine. Notably Air/Water at the very least. Second portion is that you are forgetting the Dominion bonus of HP which the Lords do not gain.

* Priest army. How ofter does a Holy-2 Banish spell hurt a VQ? Even if never, suppose I have some potential vampire-defeating units of some other type. I put them with an army as bait for the VQ to come try to get me, near the edge of her dominion. The surprise is, my mob of priests is that turn Preaching. If I have them, I have Skeptics, Inquisitors, or dominion-draining items in the army. Result: VQ arrives, gets killed, and oops - her dominion was unexpectedly sucked dry in the same turn. So no ressurrection. Or does the sequence of play not allow this to work?

PvK

This works and is an easy way to bait a VQ player into dropping their SC on you mistakenly and suddenly all those precious points vanish. Though this in and of itself can be a little bit of chore. When combined with the Castle and Temple Strategy with 10 Dominion you are going to have a bit of an issue dumping down the dominion fast enough unless you have a truly mammoth amount of Holy 3 Priests or Cerimonial Faith

[ May 05, 2004, 00:29: Message edited by: Zen ]

[Kel]

Originally posted by Zen:
From the Polls, there is a different consensus. Or the Old Boy's Network is huge.

I honestly don't know what you are referring to.
The clam poll (and I thought we were talking about pretenders) shows that the majority think clams are over-powered (I am not counting the ones that said they wouldn't mind a change). To be fair, 2/3rds, at this time also said the poll was biased. Either way, though, I don't see your point about what the polls prove or where you are going with it.

Originally posted by Zen:
Yes, that just means you have your safety blanket for any mistakes you make.

No, it doesn't, really. If a decision is bad for a mortal pretender but good for an immortal one, that is an extra option, an extra strategy, not a safety net for careless play.

Originally posted by Zen:
It's not a side note, if you are prone to either A.) Mistakes or B.) Being surprised.

or C) Using your pretenders abilities to the fullest.

Originally posted by Zen:
Where Immortality shines is in defense, making people pay a larger attrition per province taken inside your dominion. Since at least a percentage of people prefer the "Defense, defense, defense" mentality this molds well with how they think and how they play.

Immortality shines in many places. Even if making people pay a larger attrition per province were the only one, that's not a safety blanket for the pretender, that is giving an extra strategy to the pretender.

And again, immortality effectively includes recuperation. Are you contending that good play means your pretender never gets hit at all ? While I admit to not being an experienced player, I would think that most SC pretenders who never chances getting hit and never take a chance on dying are not fulfilling their potential.

Most games, strategy and otherwise, are based, somewhere, on risk vs. reward. Immortality lets you take the bigger risks for the bigger rewards...only it removes the risks (within your domain, anyway).

- Kel

[Gandalf Parker]

Maybe we need a Van Helsing?

Actually I thought the VQ was susceptable to priests just as much as the rest of the common Ermor group. How about if certain damages were alittle more permanent. She doesnt need to be made weak, just beatable by a fairly available strategy

Priests should be permanent banishment

routing to a non-friendly province should be non-returnable

a susceptability to something. Astral magic?

Originally posted by Kel:

The clam poll (and I thought we were talking about pretenders) shows that the majority think clams are over-powered (I am not counting the ones that said they wouldn't mind a change). To be fair, 2/3rds, at this time also said the poll was biased. Either way, though, I don't see your point about what the polls prove or where you are going with it.

The first clam poll, not the "may or may not be biased" clam poll.

No, it doesn't, really. If a decision is bad for a mortal pretender but good for an immortal one, that is an extra option, an extra strategy, not a safety net for careless play.

Please use an example that is a good decision for an immortal that is a bad decision for a nonimmortal who is more powerful.

C) Using your pretenders abilities to the fullest.

And these would be?

Immortality shines in many places. Even if making people pay a larger attrition per province were the only one, that's not a safety blanket for the pretender, that is giving an extra strategy to the pretender.

Which they pay for by being inherently weaker/more costly. And this is not an "only pretender" thing. So I don't see how this is a VQ only thing, shouldn't you be crusading against all immortality?

And again, immortality effectively includes recuperation. Are you contending that good play means your pretender never gets hit at all ? While I admit to not being an experienced player,

I'm condending good play can minimize the chance of this. To the point where the risk is worth the reward. Some pretenders are given recuperation base and there are various ways to deal with any afflictions gained in the game if you do happen to run across a bad run. And afflictions take even VQ's time to heal.

I would think that most SC pretenders who never chances getting hit and never take a chance on dying are not fulfilling their potential.

Not never, but not to the point of being rendered ineffective. Just because you use your pretender with and in a situation where it doesn't drop their chance of dying to 100% doesn't mean they arn't fullfilling their potential. It means that you can't take the same mentality you have taken with your VQ SC. Where you can die any number of times and it doesn't matter.

Most games, strategy and otherwise, are based, somewhere, on risk vs. reward.

That is exactly the point, Immortality removes the risk but at a cost. Some feel this cost more than makes up for that ease of use mentality. It doesn't however make it overpowered.

[Kel]

Originally posted by Zen:
Please use an example that is a good decision for an immortal that is a bad decision for a nonimmortal who is more powerful.

Let's say I have a shot at taking out an opponents SC pretender, in my domain, but only by risking my own. Let's say VQ has a 25% chance of taking out said pretender but I could have had a specific, non immortal and had a 35% chance (for whatever reason). It might be disadvantageous to risk my mortal pretender when I could, instead send the VQ. Thus, it is an extra, *valid* strategic option.

Which they pay for by being inherently weaker/more costly.

Absolutely. I am not disagreeing with that. I am just disagreeing with the perception that immortality is only useful to make up for poor play.

And this is not an "only pretender" thing. So I don't see how this is a VQ only thing, shouldn't you be crusading against all immortality?

I am not crusading at all. I am only disagreeing with the logic behind specific statements made by other crusaders.

Much as I feel about Ermor (or clams or any other balance issue), the only thing that truly bothers me about the VQ is that she is reducing the variety of my MP games. Even here, it doesn't bother me that much since less than half the nations use her in most of my games. My personal feeling is that she probably is over-powered but not invincible and if she was, say, limited to only one nation, particularly one that was not used every game (like Ulm, for example), I wouldn't particularly care at all.

I am not suggesting this happen, I am just trying to express that it is not precisely something being out of balance that affects the game, it is that something being too far out of balance can cause a loss of variety in MP game play.

I'm condending good play can minimize the chance of this. To the point where the risk is worth the reward. Some pretenders are given recuperation base and there are various ways to deal with any afflictions gained in the game if you do happen to run across a bad run. And afflictions take even VQ's time to heal.

Absolutely. Immortality isn't perfect or overwhelming or outrageously broken. I am just contending that it is a quite strong ability and is not limited to covering mistakes but does, in itself, allow strategies that are not worth it, risk vs. reward wise...to now be worth it, because of the immortality.

It doesn't take a bad player, or a mistake, to take advantage of better risk vs. reward.

That is exactly the point, Immortality removes the risk but at a cost. Some feel this cost more than makes up for that ease of use mentality. It doesn't however make it overpowered.

I agree. Immortality alone doesn't make a pretender over-powered. If people perceive that I am suggesting that, than I have mis-communicated my intentions. So perhaps I should summarize what I am saying.

Immortality is a strong ability, and a *very* strong ability when combined with an SC chassis. It can, and should, be compensated for with design points or other weaknesses. It is not a side-note, nor a tool for only poor players. It allows one to dramatically reduce risk and this, in itself, opens up additional strategies and risk vs. reward scenarios.

- Kel

[AhhhFresh]

Zen:

While I generally agree with you, I think you're missing a large part of the point.

You and Norfleet and whomever the other "elite" players are... are in the minority of the Dom II playerbase. Odds would dictate that most of us lose most of our MP games... particularly when we play against the likes of you. (Though I've not played either of you)

So to truly evaluate a VQ's "balance", you have to consider the lesser players, who obviously outnumber the "elite" ones by a large margin...

The fact that immortality is much more forgiving of mistakes is not at all a small issue... because that's what players like me do... we make mistakes... because we haven't had enough MP experience to know what every nation can throw at us, and hence we might send our SC pretender into a situation that could mean their death.

The fact that a VQ is mostly immune to these "bad decisions" is why she is so popular... and gives a distict advantage over another player of the same "moderate skill level" who is similarly mistake prone... but doesn't have a VQ.

I'm not in favor of nerfing Immortality itself, because that would nerf other units... but something should probably be done... since most poor to moderate players think she's da bomb...

I do imagine that the fervor will die out within a month, as most of the moderately skilled players who picked VQ's as pretenders as the flavor du jour will have lost their MP games at that point... but she still seems unbalanced to some extent.