Arcane Nexus

mivayan · #1 May 28th, 2007, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Velusion said:
It still doesn't change the fact that AN is a "game over" spell if it stays up - not a fun mechanic.

Oh I don't think it should be removed... but either reducing the effect to say %25 or upping the pearl cost to 300 would help a lot.

Or set a roof for the income it can give. It costs 150 to cast, cap it at 100+2d6oe each turn? Then it's no stronger than... utterdark.

Baalz · #2 May 28th, 2007, 07:39 PM

Well, granted I haven't played a huge number of MP games, but I've yet to see it cast by someone who wasn't already very likely going to win anyway. I agree it's a critical bug that you get gems the first turn, but if it were changed so that there was a chance to dispel it before it payed out it then its fine. If you can keep it up despite the fact that you've basically declared war on everybody else in the game you deserve to win.

Ygorl · #3 May 28th, 2007, 08:50 PM

I'm in the "it's okay" camp, I think. It's obviously incredibly powerful, but if you can maintain it for a long time against the rest of the world's combined gem income (and remember, it costs 150 to cast and 30 to dispel) either you've got them way out-powered or they're not very smart, and in either case you're probably going to win. Or, they've got better things to spend their gems on, in which case maybe you won't win...

Velusion · #4 May 28th, 2007, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Ygorl said:
...or they're not very smart...

You're confusing self-interest with common interest. Often players who are already getting beat up or who don't stand a chance at winning won't bother to help out. Why should they care? So in reality only a very select few nations who have a shot at winning care. Their combined pearl income is often less than the pearl income of the AN caster.

I dunno, seems like in the games I've lasted until the end AN always is the clincher that seals it. I'm just tired of participating in AN-dispel pacts that never seem to work. It just gets old and lame after awhile.

Id rather the game be decided by a climatic battle(s) then just see everyone's hands go up in the air and leave once the first dispel for AN fails. Feels cheesy.

Archonsod · #5 May 29th, 2007, 03:44 AM

Quote:

Velusion said:
You're confusing self-interest with common interest. Often players who are already getting beat up or who don't stand a chance at winning won't bother to help out. Why should they care? So in reality only a very select few nations who have a shot at winning care. Their combined pearl income is often less than the pearl income of the AN caster.

Sounds like you have a problem with the players rather than the spell.

Quote:

Id rather the game be decided by a climatic battle(s) then just see everyone's hands go up in the air and leave once the first dispel for AN fails. Feels cheesy.

Why bother with the dispel then? Presumably, if those nations interested really do have a chance at winning then it would represent a serious military bloc. A combined war pact would be a better idea, until either the casting player was defeated or the spell was removed. Unless the power balance is way out of whack, then even the power of AN won't be sufficient against such an alliance.
Should be easier to sell to the other players too. Presumably those in with a chance of winning will be fairly close in power (at least in their own heads). You can appeal to their sense of competition - point out that the lands thus captured may be the edge they need to become dominant. Just make sure the only one who's going to be in that position when the dust settles is yourself

Velusion · #6 May 29th, 2007, 04:04 AM

Quote:

Archonsod said:
Sounds like you have a problem with the players rather than the spell.

I'm not sure I understand this comment. Are you refuting my observations that players do generally act like that... or telling me I need to play with more egalitarian players?

Quote:

Archonsod said:
A combined war pact would be a better idea, until either the casting player was defeated or the spell was removed. Unless the power balance is way out of whack, then even the power of AN won't be sufficient against such an alliance.

That seems to be the default for when AN is cast. But I have to disagree with your assumption - the power of the AN is usually enough to fight off everyone combined. Remember it's usually only cast by players fully aware that everyone will attack them... so only someone in the top three will usually even try it and they will be ready. And by this time he might only have one or two fronts to worry about - a player across the map can't reach him easily.

Ironhawk · #7 May 29th, 2007, 04:19 AM

I fully agree with Velusion. "Game Ender" spells ruin the fun of a game. You can argue till the end of time about whether it should be able to be dispelled or what the proper cost is. Really none of it matters though because being in the "Dispel this or lose the game" position is always massively un-fun and disappointing. Why would anyone want to play a game when faced with a situation like that?

Archonsod · #8 May 29th, 2007, 04:51 AM

Quote:

Velusion said:
I'm not sure I understand this comment. Are you refuting my observations that players do generally act like that... or telling me I need to play with more egalitarian players?

Bit of both

:

The problem is what you're offering to the player. Dispelling AN at that point means little to those who are basically trying to hang on. Offering them provinces on the other hand might allow them back into the game.
It also plays into your own hands, since ideally the provinces of the caster will end up in multiple player's hands. The last thing you want is to replace one superpower with another...

Quote:

so only someone in the top three will usually even try it and they will be ready.

If there's such a large gap between the top three players then the caster has pretty much already won, AN is simply speeding up the endgame.

Quote:

And by this time he might only have one or two fronts to worry about - a player across the map can't reach him easily.

There's ways around it should it come to that. They don't necessarily need to attack over the border either - summoning spells which attack provinces and the like are equally useful, despite feeding AN. The idea is to pressure the caster on all fronts to prevent them forming a concentrated defence rather than to seriously damage him. Ideally, you just want them to distract him enough to make your own conquest easier (thus placing you in the game winning position

)

Velusion · #9 May 28th, 2007, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Baalz said:
Well, granted I haven't played a huge number of MP games, but I've yet to see it cast by someone who wasn't already very likely going to win anyway. I agree it's a critical bug that you get gems the first turn, but if it were changed so that there was a chance to dispel it before it payed out it then its fine. If you can keep it up despite the fact that you've basically declared war on everybody else in the game you deserve to win.

True the fix would help, but I don't think it would stop AN from still being the "Game Ender" for lots of games. I do agree the leader usually casts it - but I'd rather at least give the second and third place players a shot at beating the leader rather than just have them give up because hope is lost....

vfb · #10 May 29th, 2007, 12:23 AM

How about the caster of the Arcane Nexus gets a horror mark plus chance of horror attack every time gems roll in, the strength of which depends on the number of incoming gems? Like a private little AC just for the caster. It's not even totally unthematic, maybe the horrors are attracted by the spawning of the gems or something.