global enchantments when there are 5 already?

capnq · #1 July 9th, 2006, 01:32 PM

Quote:

archaeolept said: 2. if not, it will compete w/ one of yours that is already up.

I hope you are mistaken about this. If true, it seems like a really poor design decision.

archaeolept · #2 July 9th, 2006, 01:34 PM

dunno what's poor about it... other than it irritates the player - but if you got rid of elements that cause trouble for the players, that's like half of Dominions

generally, to support a claim that something is a poor design decision, it is considered polite to actually provide some argument...

capnq · #3 July 10th, 2006, 10:48 AM

Quote:

archaeolept said: generally, to support a claim that something is a poor design decision, it is considered polite to actually provide some argument...

Good point, my bad.

It makes no sense to me that magic spells would preferentially interfere with other spells by the same caster. Especially when competing with spells supported by an enemy.

OTOH, the limit of five global enchantments only makes sense from a metagame programming perspective anyway.

archaeolept · #4 July 10th, 2006, 11:33 AM

yah, that's why the rule is irritating to the (usually dominating) player - but it probably works from a balance perspective, as it makes it more difficult for someone w/ an edge in gems to corner the globals, or to parlay gem producing globals into further ones...

Vicious Love · #5 July 10th, 2006, 12:19 PM

Quote:

archaeolept said:
yah, that's why the rule is irritating to the (usually dominating) player - but it probably works from a balance perspective, as it makes it more difficult for someone w/ an edge in gems to corner the globals, or to parlay gem producing globals into further ones...

Erm... wouldn't it just make it easier for the quickest researcher to corner the globals? Once they're full, any one other player could only replace ONE global spell. Which makes absolutely no sense. You sure about this rule?

Cainehill · #6 July 10th, 2006, 01:59 PM

It definately doesn't take down one of your own first, except as a side effect of choosing one of the five at random - I've blown my own globals down, but have also taken down those of other players while I had some up.

I suspect that Arch thinks it takes down one of his own because he so often has multiple globals up : if a player already has 2 globals up, it's 40% likely to try to override one of his spells, and with 3 up, it's 60% likely.

That's one reason I'll often try to dispel a global if there are five up and I have more than one of my own - means I've got a much better chance of not screwing my own enchantments up.

Vicious Love · #7 July 10th, 2006, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Cainehill said:

It definately doesn't take down one of your own first, except as a side effect of choosing one of the five at random - I've blown my own globals down, but have also taken down those of other players while I had some up.

I'd surmised the same, but not enough experience with replacing globals to be absolutely sure my memory isn't screwing with me.

Quote:

That's one reason I'll often try to dispel a global if there are five up and I have more than one of my own - means I've got a much better chance of not screwing my own enchantments up.

Does that actually work in lategame multiplayer? Wouldn't everyone simultaneously jockey for the empty slot, making it empty in name alone?