Are devils worth 7 blood each?

[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.

[The_Tauren13]

And the people who don't, like me, play small maps ( like Karan with 17 players! ), and we all go home happy. Quit whining. So maybe the game isn't perfectly balanced, but it is one of the best games I have ever played, simply because there are so many strategies. Eliminating long-term strategies would do nothing but take away from why this game is fun.

[Soapyfrog]

The_Tauren13 said:
So maybe the game isn't perfectly balanced, but it is one of the best games I have ever played, simply because there are so many strategies. Eliminating long-term strategies would do nothing but take away from why this game is fun.

Does not compute. If you play on a large map you must pursue a long term strategy of clamming/fetishing/blood stoning/soul contracting. Doesnt sound like "so many strategies" to me. Sounds like, effectively, only 4, which are all slight variants on the same strategy... and really you should be implementing all four.

I guess there is some strategy in what you DO with all your gem/devil income, but not much (mostly empower to cast wish). When you have no hard decisions to make, there is not much strategy involved.

If you play on a SMALL map you should STILL pursue a clamming strategy as it will ensure your final victory if you come out of the dogfight alive, although I TOTALLY AGREE that in this case it is much harder to do because you SHOULD be in conflict much earlier and more continuously.

[johan osterman]

Soapyfrog said:
...

If you play on a SMALL map you should STILL pursue a clamming strategy as it will ensure your final victory if you come out of the dogfight alive, although I TOTALLY AGREE that in this case it is much harder to do because you SHOULD be in conflict much earlier and more continuously.

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.

[Soapyfrog]

johan osterman said:
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.

Oh hey I said it would be harder to clamhoard for the reasons you mention, but if you can make it out of the dogfight intact it will win you the game, so it seems like a good plan to me!

[Cainehill]

Soapyfrog said:

Oh hey I said it would be harder to clamhoard for the reasons you mention, but if you can make it out of the dogfight intact it will win you the game, so it seems like a good plan to me!

And if I save _all_ my gold by not buying troops, thus not having to pay upkeep on them, it will win me the game if I can make it out of the dogfight alive.

And when boxing, if a fighter can Last through the first 8 rounds without ever swinging at his opponent, he'll be able to win the fight in the 9th round because his opponent will be tired while he's fresh.

You go ahead and invest as much as you can in clams while in wars on small maps; as you say, if you survive you'll be in good position, but I expect your opponents will be eating your lunch.

[Soapyfrog]

Cainehill said:
You go ahead and invest as much as you can in clams while in wars on small maps; as you say, if you survive you'll be in good position, but I expect your opponents will be eating your lunch.

Because I spent some water gems on clams? I really doubt that would lose me the game.

I have lost games becuase I spent those gems on things OTHER than clamming though. So I know that happens

[Soapyfrog]

Gandalf Parker said:
Surely those offer some challenge to the clammers.

Do they? I dont know!! I cant understand how they would. Massive gem income gives you freedom of action without significant constraints... seems like a no-brainer to me!

Well if there are counter-strategies then I'd love to hear them in detail, since I would prefer not to have to clam like a madman just to keep up.

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

I dunno... can you really NOT clam and survive in a game that is certainly going to Last more that 50-60 turns? I mean out of 17 maybe not all of them will use that strategy but the winner at the end of the game WILL be a someone who has implemented one or more of these investment strategies.

johan osterman said:
Also, as has been pointed out by various other posters, some players enjoy the presence and dominance of the high end troops and spells.

I enjoy that too, but I think a GOOD game is one where players are forced to make DIFFICULT decisions with regards to the use of their limited resources. If you have ivnestment strategies that allow for exponential growth, but a) there is not equal opportunity to use them and b) the game doesnt continue to scale as your economy grows, then all the high end magic and summons etc become massively devalued.

[Cohen]

Clam is effectively strong, but you can handle a loner clamming if you're stronger.

But investing in clams requires a good amount of water gems, especially at starting. Sadly none can see you're clamming til lyou reveal your strenght, and this IMO is the bad thing.
If people could see you're raising your gem income every turn far beyond your province ownage chance by finding sites, probably will gang up unless they want to find themselves against dozens of horrors that run in a totally unpredictable way in your land, to have to face some wish empowered SCs or such. In a long term game you'll find yourself without any chance of global spell during more than 1 turn too.
The other bad stuff is that a scout can keep the clam and so is immune to most ranged spells and raiding (but usually they're inside a castle)
IMO Clams should work only on mages (they know how to take care of those trinkets and such) and the mage should be set to research (unless we want to change the clam working system, as the mage is required to do an action to "alchemize" the free pearls out from the clams he's bringing).

[Thufir]

Cohen said:
IMO Clams should work only on mages (they know how to take care of those trinkets and such) and the mage should be set to research (unless we want to change the clam working system, as the mage is required to do an action to "alchemize" the free pearls out from the clams he's bringing).

I like this idea! This sounds (to my novice mind) like a change that wouldn't be too dangerous to make, and is worth consideration of including in a patch. Although perhaps there's some difficulty in coding this, I think this is a very appropriate change to the way clams are handled.