Pricing of Mages ... is it balanced?

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Pickles:
*Goetic masters are cheaper after 40 turns &
Amethyst?(the blood ones) amazons may be cheaper too.

Goetic Masters can be considered to have a hidden cost of 2-3x what their actual list price is, due to the fact that mandatory turmoil will cause you to have about 1/2 to 1/3 of the income of a normal player. It does seem that blood mages have an unusual premium associated with their cost in many cases, though, and "pure" blood magic is generally not very impressive.

[Cohen]

Well Goetik Master have 2B, 2F and 1?, + Holy Magic 2, and are sacred.
So I believe for 190 they're damn good.

True you've to take mandatory Turmoil 1 and Heat 1, that reduces a lot your income to have Goetik Master.

However I should underline that Warlock Apprentices if used to blood hunt will cripple your research, since you can only build blood huntes and good researchers in capitol.

[Sheap]

due to the fact that mandatory turmoil will cause you to have about 1/2 to 1/3 of the income of a normal player.

How come you keep saying this? Turmoil-1 earns 75% as much as Order-3, and that's not even considering the points you save (which could be used to buy Production or Growth to reduce the shortfall). If you've taken Sloth or Death (as I know you are fond of Sloth) then the difference is even less than that.

Yes, the occasional natural disaster will reduce your income, but it will not cut it in half, especially if you use the points you saved from not taking Order to buy Luck.

[johan osterman]

Cohen: The mages are not intended to be equally cost effective for all nations. Caelum have cheaper powefull than any other nations not because they have two hitpoints less but because cheap mages is intended as a feature of the magocracy Caelum. Other mage prices vary similarily for similar reasons. The different nations are not intended to pay the same cost for the same punch, it is one of the ways in which the nations are differentiated, both thematically and gameplay wise.

Edit: rereading the orignal post drunk I see it is barely comprehensible, I have tried to correct the grammar.

[ August 05, 2004, 22:07: Message edited by: johan osterman ]

[Pickles]

1/2 to 1/3 sounds possible for early game after upkeep as say upkeep is 40% gross income then if your gross income goes down 20%, your net icome goes down 1/3
If gross drops 40%, net drops by 2/3 etc

I forgot warlocks were capital - only you really need some indeps to help out - but who doesn't?
& it's not like they are rare.

[ August 05, 2004, 17:47: Message edited by: Pickles ]

[Cohen]

That's because Caelum is one of the best nations!

[Inigo Montoya]

Originally posted by johan osterman:
Cohen: The mages are not intended to be equally cost effective for all nations. Caelum for have cheaper powefull than any other nations not because they have to hitpoints less but because cheap mages is intended as a feature of the magocracy Caelum. Other mage prices vary similarily for similar reasons. The different nations are not intended to pay the same cost for the same punch, it is one of the ways in which the nations are differentiated, both thematically and gameplay wise.

Exactly! I think we should all be very wary of trying to homogenize this outstanding game. If we "balance" every nation's mages against every other nation we will end up with every nation playing the same and feeling the same. We'll have every nation with 10 hp mages and the same magic paths for the same cost. It's the only way to "balance" it. Screw balancing mages if that's the price we'd have to pay for it! I'd rather have one nation's mages being more powerful for the cost. On the other hand, balancing nation to nation is a worthwile endeavor so everyone has an equal chance of winning. Balancing mage to mage or commander to commander or archer to archer, etc just ends up with every nation playing exactly like every other. No more of these kinds of unit comparisons please, Cohen. Focus your efforts instead on comparing nations. It's a lot harder to do because it requires a greater synthesis of information, but it has more value.