Excess design points

[guybrush threepwood]

johan osterman said:
Eh. You do no think 5000 starting gold would be bit unbalanced? This suggestion, or rather a very similar one, has been considered and rejected before. If anything like this were to pass the gold per design point would have to be much lower than 10:1, more like 1:1 or 2:1. Also in keeping with the proud paternalistc traditions of illwinter we believe that forcing you to 'waste' 10-20 dp on occasion will foster in you a healthy pragmatism.

Edit: capping at 39 obviously removes some of the balance concerns.

OK, what about 7 gold per design point for the first 39 excess design points.

This would mean that in the most extreme case with 39 excess points one would gain 273gp which is comparable to the income of turn 1 (with heavy taxing).

If I could choose between 273 extra gp and one extra scale (which 39 points is almost) I would certainly always choose the scale.

Or make it 5gp/dp for 195...

Of course the next generation of dom2 players would grow up without spine and pragmatism, but hey, screw those little brats...

[Cainehill]

I've posted the same idea previously - even 1 gold per design point would be _something_. Especially since many times when starting, you're just 15 short of being able to recruit the commander and units you want, or of being able to hire a particular mercenary.

I think 10 gold per point is too much though. You normally start with 400, and by dropping 20 pretender points you'd get an extra 200 gold?

Having an extra 5000 gold (even capped at 1000 as suggested) would be obscene - recruiting all the mercs, maxing production, building extra castles. It'd be bringing the, mmm, 'berserker rush' to Dominions. Nations with strong troops (like Ulm) or very good non-capital mages (Caelum) could easily take a stab at steamrolling over everyone before anyone else could get started.

I'd suggest more like 1 or 2 gold per point, for a maximum of 39 points. (The most you would ever be _forced_ to throw away, as you can always add a scale for 40.)

Anything much greater than that would have the potential to be rather imbalancing, imo.

[Sheap]

I would be happy with something like 5:1, cap at 39 points. 1:1 or 2:1 is so insignificant as to be almost a mockery - even at the very start of the game, it would be hard even to notice an extra 20 gold or so. But an extra 100 gold would mean an extra cheap mage or half a temple, much less of an effect than spending the points on better dominion or scale, but enough that the player could say, "at least it wasn't wasted."

[Taqwus]

It might be perversely amusing to run an Ashen Empire game with a cheap and low-magic pretender, horrible scales, vast amounts of gold, and no national units to spend it on. (AE... with mercenary fever? Hm.)

But a cap would seem reasonable to me... and if configurable on a per-game basis, a zero cap (on unused dp points turning into anything) would suit the traditionalists while an insanely high cap might lead to Ermorian Mercenary Madness and other strange strategies, which might once in a while suit those looking for more "experimental" games.

[Kel]

I think the amount of gold you get should be low enough that a cap isn't necessary. A token amount of gold, like 1:1 for example. Problem is, at that point, it is an extremely low priority request, imo.

I tend to think that large numbers of spare points would occur less if scales were balanced by differing costs. We all know that Order, for example, is one of the most universally useful scales. If it cost 45 and growth, or something, cost 35, it would be a more significant change, as well as making it a bit easier to balance out points.

- Kel

[Cainehill]

Maybe a sliding scale might satisfy both points of view. 5 gold for the first ... 5 pretender points, 4 for the next 5, scaling down to 0.

That way, you'd get ... 75 gold for 25 pretender points wasted. Noticeable, but not terribly game-altering.

You might still lose some pretender points, but it's most often possible to come within 25 points (via castles, dominion, etc) - I know I jigger things so I rarely lose a full 30 or more. The sole real exceptions are for pretenders with obscene path costs (like 80), where you've chosen a national theme and can't see "upgrading" to the 100 citadel with its 600 gold cost and 4 turn build time, or you're based on the watchtower and can't afford going to a 40 pointer.

[Arralen]

Does by chance anyone of you know the game "Stars!" ?

It's race design process is very similar to that of Dom2:

1) you choose your "primary trait", which governs what secial tech and ships you get (nation)
2) you choose your "secondary traits", which are special abilities (magic paths)
3) you set your economic and environmental characteristics (scales & fort)
4) .. you spend your leftover design points on either a)more starting factories, b)more starting mines, c)more starting minerals, d)more starting defences or e)more starting mineral concentration ..

I must admit, though, that these options are not balanced well. This results from the fact that they never where adjusted for "gameplay reality" but stayed very much the same over the years. But the game was analyzed to death, and today you'll need >25k ressources/turn after 50 turns to be competitive, while the devs considered 2k a good score in the very beginning. So today it's very clear that's either factories or mineral/concentration is the way to go, as it gives you an economic head start.

To get back to Dom2 - if a similar mechanism is added, I would suggest it does not have multiple possibilities to spend your points on, as this is impossible to balance.

But spending you points on it should make a difference, or it would be (obviously) superfluous. And getting 40 or even 80 gold will not give you so much of an economie head start that it at least partly equals out the loss of one scale. (Theoretically. I would second the 39 pts. cap to prevent abuse, though) I think 5:1 would be quite ok - will get you a free temple, or one free (cheap) mage or double starting troops (after some turns of building).

[The_Tauren13]

i vote for 5:1 with cap at 39

but if the devs are interested, changing the scale costs is a great idea. i mean, order is probably worth twice productivity, and luck and growth are worth less than magic.

so maybe: order 50; productivity 25; heat/cold 40; growth 35; luck 30; magic 40.
obviously im a newb so perhaps these are bad scale costs but i think a change of some sort would be good

then perhaps a scaled thing for left over points, starting at 10 gold for 1 point, 19 for 2, 27 for 3, 34 for 4, 40 for 5, etc... all the way down to 55 gold for 10 points, and with different scale costs you would probably rarely have more than 10 left over

[Gandalf Parker]

Stars is one of the games I most refer to when trying to find people who would like Dom. I do alot of "if you liked" Stars, Master of Magic, and lately another Shrapnel game here called Space Empires IV. They all have the "make my race to play my way" type of game feel to them.

As to the extra points question....
Maybe instead of finding a new benefit we could return it to an old one. I know we select the dominion strength as a 1-10 but there are game variables which apply to dominion and dont act in quite so large steps. So Im thinking that the actual game variable might be something like 1-100. If the dominion selector were changed to allow choosing from 1-10 but show the results as 1-100, then a note that extra points will go to dominion strength.

Of course I dont mean a placebo thing. Only if the game variable actually supports such a range where 44 really is treated as 45 and not rounded to 4. In fact, as I think of this.. it feels very much in game-theme. You are making a pretender and you have points which should all start as dominion strength. Your additional powers/bonuses should appear as though you are stealing from the dominion strength you could have in order to get the other goodies.
Just a thought.

[tinkthank]

Guybrush, I like the idea.
I think that 3:1 sounds like an acceptable trade-off to me, and capped at 39 "extra" points.
If, however, the idea of "extra population" were utilized instead of insta-gold, it would balance a misuse by ermor even more, since its themes would kill off the benefit quickly.