Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN

[HJFudge]

lol NT Jedi wants improved province defense as an option. Or at least thats what Ive gathered from every single post hes made in this topic so far. It'd be an interesting option depending exactly how it was implemented.

Lord Bob:

As Ulm, you will roll right over any enemy province only protected by PD. But ESPECIALLY in a one on one situation,
you are going to have trouble getting past any chokepoints the enemy has. Depending on the map, this will either be easier or harder to do.

But you still might lose the game, because your not the only one who will be attacking.

[NTJedi]

HJFudge said:
lol NT Jedi wants improved province defense as an option. Or at least thats what Ive gathered from every single post hes made in this topic so far. It'd be an interesting option depending exactly how it was implemented.

When it's implemented will hopefully be DOM_4. How it's implemented can be by several factors... these are just examples of theories so no one should flip out. Construction research could provide better body armor, an extra scale during pretender design which specifically targets the units of PD, an academy building can provide increased morale and attack skill (destroyed same as lab if province lost), gem investment can provide strength bonus, health bonus and magic resistance bonus(elixirs), gold investment can provide improved shields and helms. I'm sure the developers can add other ideas to the list.
Some type of upkeep based on capital distance should also exist to prevent a powerful player from becoming more powerful.

[Zylithan]

Hopefully this isn't considered offensive, except how it is meant to be...

[sum1lost]

Death bless will molest ulmish troops and pretender, end of story. Afflictions up the wazzoo, with mr based an attack.

[Evilhomer]

Whatever pretender you build there is a counter (not to mention your pretender cannot be everywhere). Also the bandar log player is allowed a pretender of his own you know.

Edit: I feel we have argued this as far as it will go, if you want to test the ulm v bandar log deal feel free to send me a pm.

[Sombre]

Want to play Top Trumps? Before we start, I should point out I've memorised the deck, so you lose. See you around.

[VedalkenBear]

Again.

All the arguing is beside the point. Bob has absolutely no basis for his argument. Let me explain.

1) His premise is flawed. He states that 'Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN' (thread subject line). This is logically equivalent to stating that these nations CANNOT win. He cites the MP win thread as his proof. Statistically, that thread does not prove his point. Therefore, his statement has no support.

2) He then explains why he believes that his unsupported premise is correct. Their PD is bad. Every single response to this point accepts, implicitly, statement 1), above. In other words, you are arguing implicitly accepting that they cannot win. This is a classic (if ridiculous) rhetorical technique. Don't follow it. Someone must prove premises before they are allowed to use them as the basis for other arguments.

3) He does not offer a solution! He is simply describing a rather ridiculous reason for a nonexistant problem. He is complaining, purely and simply. At least NTJedi suggests a solution to this (though again, he is implicitly accepting 1) and most likely 2) above, which is incorrect). Offer some sort of solution if you are going to complain.

Bob, answer these points, or shut. the. hell. up. Even IW people have pointed out to you this very issue, which means the designers of the game _are not going to listen to you until you respond to this_. To the point, you are trolling. This is against forum policy, and you should expect a warning and/or banning for it.

[jaif]

One thought. If you start a game on a 2-space map - one space ulm, one space bander log - then bander log probably loses unless I'm missing something. But make it a 2 person game with 500 areas, and ulm doesn't even get to bander log for a long time.

One other thought - everybody here is so quick with telling the bander log player to micro-manage a ton of patrolling forces - that doesn't sound like a lot of fun, even if it is viable.

One question - has anybody here played Bander Log and done well in MP? Even if it's not a win, it's a start.

-Jeff

[Hadrian_II]

jaif said:
One thought. If you start a game on a 2-space map - one space ulm, one space bander log - then bander log probably loses unless I'm missing something. But make it a 2 person game with 500 areas, and ulm doesn't even get to bander log for a long time.

One other thought - everybody here is so quick with telling the bander log player to micro-manage a ton of patrolling forces - that doesn't sound like a lot of fun, even if it is viable.

One question - has anybody here played Bander Log and done well in MP? Even if it's not a win, it's a start.

-Jeff

Hint, the bandar player wont have to micromanage patrollers, as his army of elephants will siege ulms castles, and dual blessed tigre rider raiding parties will either be raiding ulm, or conquer back raided provinces one by one (and yes, the tigre riders will be able to kill 17 armoured archers and one commander)

If ulm wins this, bandar log did something very wrong.

[jaif]

The second thought and the first thought were not connected. In the first thought, I'm pointing out that PD is more important when you start close to each other, and less important when you spread out.

In the second thought, I'm pointing out that when you have many people on many fronts, it is annoying to keep patrols around parrying someone else's jabs, especially when they play guessing games with you.

I'm not saying it isn't doable, but it sure doesn't sound fun.

-Jeff