Are devils worth 7 blood each?

[Boron]

Soapyfrog said:
I think exponential/quadratic growth is not a good thing in a fantasy game that doesn't scale well past turn 60 or so. Who wants to see Doom Horrors getting summoned 1 or even 2 per turn? Who wants to see an army of 120 devils wiped out at great cost to return completely regenerated a turn later? Even worse, who wants to fight their way through an mile-wide mass of vampires which respawns every turn no matter how often you kill it and keeps growing to boot?

The worst part is there are essentially only 3 or 4 ROI quadratic/exponential growth strategies that really pay off: clamming, fetishing, soul contracts, and vampire lords. That doesnt exactly give the game a lot of depth, or a much of an nteresting end game... in a 17 player game SOMEONE is going to carry off one or more of these strategies more that likely and, assuming some level competetance, dominate because of it.

Those empires that had to fight tooth and nail to survive and could not put the neccessary resources into clamming or whatever, get steamrolled.

Eliminating these strategies would surely result in a more balanced game.

Yeah . The worst thing is that clamming together with wishing gives you access to everything then . You can wish for a bit blood to get then the blood autosummons started , can wish the unique SCs you want in endless amounts etc. etc.
So once it comes to real lategame the nations who can't wish because they have no good astral mages + couldn't clamhoard well are severely disadvantaged .

And before especially the devilhoarding is evil .

After about turn 50-60 normally the ability to use one or more of these hoard strategies with exponential growth is the most important thing .
Furthermore normally nations don't get too big that quick and if they do they fight for lots of turns against their neighbors so they are actually weakened .

Especially Caelum + Abysia are here probably a problem because they are so strong in early game already too .

[johan osterman]

There are easy and simple solutions to your problems. Fiddle with the game settings and victory conditions, use smaller maps, attack players before strategies with 10 turn investement returns pay off.

If you continously play on huge maps while letting other players grow at their own pace do not be shocked if strategies with delayed investment return pays off. If you do not like it, play on smaller maps and use victory settings that encourage more agressive play etc.


Boron: I am pleased to see that you have been convinced to use punctuation, trying to decipher your post earlier was a hassle.

[Soapyfrog]

johan osterman said:
There are easy and simple solutions to your problems. Fiddle with the game settings and victory conditions, use smaller maps, attack players before strategies with 10 turn investement returns pay off.

This is not good game mechanics, period. If the solution to a Mictlan devil factory is "gang up on Mictlan early" then that's broken. If the solution to runaway economies is to play on small maps, then that's broken. The game doesnt scale!

What if I want to play a game on a huge map that doesnt become a clamming competition after turn 30-40? Short of a house rule I can't: there is NO POSSIBLE ALTERNATE STRATEGY.

johan osterman said:If you continously play on huge maps while letting other players grow at their own pace do not be shocked if strategies with delayed investment return pays off. If you do not like it, play on smaller maps and use victory settings that encourage more agressive play etc.

Its not a question "letting" them grow at their own pace. in a 17 player game, SOMEONE will manage it, and that player will win regardless of who won all the hard-fought wars in the middle game.

So there is no incentive to fight except to shoot cripples and snatch territory. You certainly don't want to risk an evenly matched conflict becuase that will simply cripple you.

It would be more interesting to me if magic sites and powerful summons etc. did not devalue so quickly as the game progresses. It would be interesting to see armies of national troops still relevant in the late game.

[Alneyan]

In the case of Soul Contracts, a mod could also be used to alter the effect of the item, if you think such a change is needed. As I do not think we can currently mod magic items (I haven't checked under 2.13 though), the solution would imply a weakening of the Devils themselves, and a change of the cost of the "Bind Devil" spell.

The Soul Contract will still be a long term investment, but it would then take longer to pay back, while making direct summons cheaper as well. The actual changes are left to you, depending on your mileage. Sure, a mod will unlikely be widely used, but it should do just as well as a house rule in this case. And if magic items can currently be modded, it would be much easier to do something along these lines (the same reasoning would go with clams and the like, but it would be harder to do it with an indirect change).

[Huzurdaddi]

What if I want to play a game on a huge map that doesnt become a clamming competition after turn 30-40?

Unless someone is playing Atlantis or is astonishingly competent clams don't really come into the picture until turn 60 or so.

And arent nations like Marignon and TienChi also solutions to devils? (any nations with high priests)

No. Preists are essentially useless against devils devils have very high MR. The solution to devils is usually either ( 1 ) wrathful or ( 2 ) a SC that can tank them. Best to combine ( 1 ) and ( 2 ).

While you might object to the speed at which this happens I do not see how anyone can argue with that delayed investment payoffs should payoff.

I have to say I totally agree with this point. My only objection is ROI on some investments ( IMO soul contracts ROI is a little too high).

In general it is all about ROI vs. the speed at which the game progresses. If you are in a game in which you can be over run in 5 turns then even a 10% ROI may not be sufficient to entice you to invest. However in a game where you would not be badly hurt after 20 turns of war even a 5% ROI would seem godly.

Eliminating long-term strategies would do nothing but take away from why this game is fun.

Totally correct.

I disagree completely with this, in small agressive games resources are better spent in more direct ways then clam hoarding, especially if you are in a war.

I agree. However water gems are not amazingly useful they have some uses boots of quickness, perhaps swords of quick, but in general they are not going to swing the war. Any extras might as well go to clams. I have to say I would love clams going to 2W1N.

About Vamps, I'd agree to remove them the Summon Allies skill. They can easily cast the vampire summoning spell.

That actually makes sense.

I don't know about it being created out of thin air but yes, there is inflation. That's a *good* thing, though. Every game has a natural life cycle and evolves through stages, otherwise research would not be a meaningful element.

That's just an EXCELLENT post KEI. I could quote the whole thing and I pretty much agree with it.

I still think that the ROI on all investment type strategies should be carefully monitored though.

There seems to have been a recent push of people who want the game to *not* evolve by discouraging the use of SC's and other mid/late game tactics, instead favoring the national troops that are more effective in the early game.

Again, excellent. I love the natural progression of the game. I do think that SC's are a *little* too powerful pretty early in the game. And I think that almost all of this "power" comes from life draining weapons. Without them SC's would have a hard time soloing huge armies but yet would still be awesome forces. But I don't think I totally want to get rid of life draining weapons since that is removing a choice from players. Probably a small tweak to the damage of all life draining weapons would be sufficient ( at least in my eyes ).

Abysya is very rushable. And is totally defenceless except a good pretender.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH! They have 1st rate troops. Please. This is not Miclain we are talking about here.

and that could cast fanaticism

Sermon of courage works dandy.

Short of a rewrite, I am in agreement with those conservatives that don't want to see the system dramatically changed. The game is clearly working, and has an extraordinarily large following, given it's non-commercial nature. To argue that the game is broken, or dramatically unbalanced is ludicrous. It flies in the face of the fact that so many smart people are playing this game, and so few can agree on what constitutes an optimal strategy.

Pretty much dead on. You can still argue though, that tweaks can be made on prices of certian units. Nothing major, just small changes.

[Arryn]

Huzurdaddi said:
Unless someone is playing Atlantis or is astonishingly competent clams don't really come into the picture until turn 60 or so.

I guess I must be "astonishingly" competent because, in my Caelum SP game (Orania, 15 nations) at turn 42 my astral site income is 1/turn and 21/turn from clams. I'd say that a 21:1 clam income ratio is by most anyone's definition "in the picture". The clams (and astral gems) do not change my strategy at all (I could live without any whatsoever), but they are sure handy to have for alchemy, which speeds some of my summonings or forgings by several turns. Oh, and I haven't been diligent in site searching, either. I'd have more clams (from more water gem income) had I been deliberately seeking to maximize my output of clams. As it is, I've just been using the water income I've come across through conquest.

[Huzurdaddi]

guess I must be "astonishingly" competent because, in my Caelum SP game (Orania, 15 nations) at turn 42 my astral site income is 1/turn and 21/turn from clams

Right and 21 per turn does not have the same kind of impact that the frog is talking about. He's talking about the 50-100 astral per turn income which feeds wishing. 21 / turn is nice and you are on the way. In maybe in 10 or 15 turns you will be GTG.

[Pickles]

I think I agree with everyone here!
Late game your gem income can be far higher if you spam gem items than if not but you have to survive. Diplomacy can sometimes replace armies for this MP. These strategies give exponential growth while any other growth in the game is not exponential. In general late game admin means I am not interested in playing game with more than about 10 provinces each or 120 ish in total. PLus I prefer the early wars & using the whole of the tech tree. So while I do think the game is a bit flawed in way I think it is soluble without any code changes by choosing maps that suit me. Admittedly if I liked teching all the way before I attacked anyone I might have issues.

So to slightly drag this in another direction has anyone considered ULM spamming. I played one MP game and was able to get a Forge of the Ancients. This with a smith (or hammer) reduces the cost of a fever fetish to one fire & one nature gem & allows any mage to make them. It reduces clams to 3S if you can get a water (1) mage.
This is a 2 turn payback or worst case - alchemising fire into nature - 5 turn.

Now that is insane growth - too much to be bothered with for me after only 30 ish but it does not take long for that to be a ludicrous number of fetishes or clams. The fire gems can be alchemised to pay for scouts to carry them.

Around turn 30 when the forge is likely to be researched Ulm will have at least 30 smiths so even one turns use of the forge would allow 30 fetishes - adding 90 earth gems to the cost makes them 5 gems each. Or if you get 2 turns use 3.5 gems each. I think the forge saved me its cost almost every turn I had it up, it is grotesque but especially for spamming.

I also got contracts for 20 slaves (from an empowered smith) which makes the ROI very good, (& I did lose at least one to a horror attack). You can make this 10 for one smith if you use the unique hammer but it may need a second empowering.

Anyway there you have a truly horrible exponential micro hell of forging

Hmm lost the plot now

dum dum

Pickles

[Gandalf Parker]

Soapyfrog said:

This is not good game mechanics, period. If the solution to a Mictlan devil factory is "gang up on Mictlan early" then that's broken. If the solution to runaway economies is to play on small maps, then that's broken. The game doesnt scale!

I havent really been following the conversation but it sounds like another "if its not head-to-head fair then its broke" discussion. ou are saying that if a strategy is offered in response to a strategy that its not an answer?

And arent nations like Marignon and TienChi also solutions to devils? (any nations with high priests)

What if I want to play a game on a huge map that doesnt become a clamming competition after turn 30-40? Short of a house rule I can't: there is NO POSSIBLE ALTERNATE STRATEGY.

You are talking about Atlantis using clams, correct? On a large map, what about the other large-map strategies. The ones that dont get a "fair play" on small maps. Pangaea sneak, Man air-drops, Caelum checkerboard, Arcos stand-and-think? Surely those offer some challenge to the clammers.

Its not a question "letting" them grow at their own pace. in a 17 player game, SOMEONE will manage it, and that player will win regardless of who won all the hard-fought wars in the middle game.

Your games have 17 people using the same strategy? No wonder you have a problem with balance issues.

[johan osterman]

Soapyfrog said:

This is not good game mechanics, period. If the solution to a Mictlan devil factory is "gang up on Mictlan early" then that's broken. If the solution to runaway economies is to play on small maps, then that's broken. The game doesnt scale!

Broken? Just because the way doesn't play the way you want on larger maps do not mean that it is broken. The game setup parameters are intended to have gameplay effects, obviously all strategies will not be equally effective with all setups. This doesn't mean the game is broken. It just means that all strategies are not optimal in all setups, which is both desirable and very hard to avoid.

What if I want to play a game on a huge map that doesnt become a clamming competition after turn 30-40? Short of a house rule I can't: there is NO POSSIBLE ALTERNATE STRATEGY.

What if I wan't to keep the cake and eat it? Short of regurgitating it up again I can't: THERE IS NO POSSIBLE STRATEGY.

Also I believe you are overstating the clam potency.

...

So there is no incentive to fight except to shoot cripples and snatch territory. You certainly don't want to risk an evenly matched conflict becuase that will simply cripple you.

I fail to see why this is particular to large game and what it has to do with soul contracts and their balancee and why it is a bad thing, it seems like entirely reasonable and indeed desirable state of affairs.

It would be more interesting to me if magic sites and powerful summons etc. did not devalue so quickly as the game progresses. It would be interesting to see armies of national troops still relevant in the late game.

While you might object to the speed at which this happens I do not see how anyone can argue with that delayed investment payoffs should payoff. Research etc need to yield significant results, or no one would bother with it. Also, as has been pointed out by various other posters, some players enjoy the presence and dominance of the high end troops and spells.