Lord of fertility

[Gandalf Parker]

It could be overpowering. Ive seen posts by some veterans that say that in certain game setups, taking growth becomes a no-brainer. So a pretender who also boosts growth cant b e considered lightly.

[Xietor]

yeah,

you take growth Gandalf, then when my armies capture your capital, i will have that many more worshipers for my pretender

[Gandalf Parker]

Xietor said:
yeah,

you take growth Gandalf, then when my armies capture your capital, i will have that many more worshipers for my pretender

Wasnt me. I rarely take growth. Go argue the point with the guys in the irc channel if you dare

[Shovah32]

But a pretender who increases growth in a single province wouldnt be such a big deal would it? I personally believe than in larger maps where you plan to keep recruiting commanders and making castles you have to atleast restrain from taking death, generally because unless you continue expanding quickly your economy slowly chokes and dies.

[Meglobob]

Shovah32 said:
But a pretender who increases growth in a single province wouldnt be such a big deal would it?

In your capital it would, if you took gowth-3 and had a pretender that doubled that for example and then took order-3 on top. You would be stinkingly rich and money talks early on in the game, more troops, more mages, more castles etc...

Remember, your capital usually provides 50%+ of your income for the first 10 or so turns. Whenever you suggest a change you have to look at how much it can be exploited in order to retain balance.

[Ewierl]

Meglobob said:

In your capital it would, if you took gowth-3 and had a pretender that doubled that for example and then took order-3 on top. You would be stinkingly rich and money talks early on in the game, more troops, more mages, more castles etc...

Remember, your capital usually provides 50%+ of your income for the first 10 or so turns. Whenever you suggest a change you have to look at how much it can be exploited in order to retain balance.

Yes, if it "doubled that" it would. But that need not be the answer. What if it increased your growth rate (0.2-0.6% if your dominion is positive) itself by 10 or 20% +20% on 0.6% increases the total to 0.72%. The difference in the long run could be considerable, but virtually nothing in the short run- and the short run is the time when it's exploitable, when your home province is the heart and soul and entirety of your income.

[Wick]

Having growth in just the capital would do wonders for old capital-only mages.

[Actuarian]

I bet you didn't know this. The lord of fertility gives giant carrots to feed his troops. Not only are the carrots nutritous but they turn armies orange, striking fear into the hearts of the enemies.

Either that or the LOF sure could use a better looking cornucopia.

[MaxWilson]

Gandalf Parker said:
Wasnt me. I rarely take growth. Go argue the point with the guys in the irc channel if you dare

Really? I would have expected you of all people, O Gandalf of the Huge Maps and Forever Long Games, to see Growth as a good investment. Do you just find it uninteresting or unthematic for the nations you play?

Any province that's had a Growth-3 dominion for 23 turns or longer is pulling in 21+% extra income, which is as good as Order-3. The advantage to Order is those initial 23 turns of higher income (of course Order and Growth is even better).

-Maximilian

[DrPraetorious]

Order also reduces the chance of random events, so it allows you to take Misfortune - the net effect of which is that Order is cheaper than Growth.

But yes, you want both.