Guide: Bandar Log - you whipped me with what?!?

[Omnirizon]

Originally Posted by Kuritza

Regarding luck/skill... skill wont make you win with Bandar Log, they just lack the tools to win with what they are guaranteed to have. Bad combat magic, terrible troops, inability to craft many important items etc.
Luck isnt much better, because even if you are lucky, you wont have enough nature gems for everything. Clams, thug items, yakshas (whole strategy seems to be based around these) - too many uses for your nature gems, which are rarely abudant.
Which sums up why Bandar Log doesnt win games.

Not to wax poetic... but...

Bandar Log and Kailasa are nations of finesse and elegance. They are ineffably powerful, and infinitely fragile. Most people don't have the touch (I didn't say skill) to play them, and they don't understand them; the range and contradiction between comments regarding the nation seen in this thread alone will attest to that.

They take zen and laser-like focus to play (I didn't say luck or skill, though both are factors).

They also take patience, and there is more micro-management involved; what to summon where to summon how to mix...

They take foresight, caution, and planning... what enemy might I face in the next twelve turns, what spells are top priority for that enemy, what does my army need to look like, where does my army need to be, how many commanders and priests do I need and where to I need them. These are the vital questions for this nation, yet surprisingly these are not always the general vital questions most people are thinking about. Most nations don't require careful foresight regarding leadership that this nation does, so people take leadership and availability for granted, and then fall flat when the lack of leadership logistics immobilizes a nation that counts mobility and flexibility among its primary strengths.

This is not a press the gas and GO GO GO nation. They take deliberate but deft maneuvering. This nation is neither a monster truck, nor a drag racer, yet that is the play paradigm most people will approach the nations with; no wonder most people fail with this one. They are kind of like mario kart, where too much gas off the line is just as bad as too little, but hit it just right and you just take off; most people are not used to thinking with that kind of vision in Dominions. This nation has heavy logistical requirements, and you have to think turns ahead; maximizing speed through one turn may actually result in a poor position for another, with a net loss of overall speed (still with the racing metaphor). And as always, sometimes your better hanging behind, making a plan, and stuffing a red turtle shell up number one's ***.

[Kuritza]

Originally Posted by Omnirizon

This is not a press the gas and GO GO GO nation. They take deliberate but deft maneuvering. This nation is neither a monster truck, nor a drag racer, yet that is the play paradigm most people will approach the nations with; no wonder most people fail with this one. They are kind of like mario kart, where too much gas off the line is just as bad as too little, but hit it just right and you just take off; most people are not used to thinking with that kind of vision in Dominions. This nation has heavy logistical requirements, and you have to think turns ahead; maximizing speed through one turn may actually result in a poor position for another, with a net loss of overall speed (still with the racing metaphor). And as always, sometimes your better hanging behind, making a plan, and stuffing a red turtle shell up number one's ***.

Thats good and true, but so far now 'most' players fail with this nation; all of them do. Which really makes me think that this nation is a little bit toooooooo far on the 'elegance' side and too thin on the 'power' side.
Elegant apes are too much in my opinion anyway.

[Omnirizon]

Originally Posted by Kuritza

Thats good and true, but so far now 'most' players fail with this nation; all of them do. Which really makes me think that this nation is a little bit toooooooo far on the 'elegance' side and too thin on the 'power' side.
Elegant apes are too much in my opinion anyway.

The fact that I never mentioned apes or monkeys but you still interpreted my post as talking about apes demonstrates the problem players have when approaching Bandar Log. The problem is most severe for them because they are the 'monkiest' of all monkey nations, whereas with Kail and Patala it is obvious that they are supposed to be support.

How is it that Gandharvas are the premier mid-game unit in many peoples opinions (and at least a first-order mid-game unit in most's minds)... and BL has terrible units? and apparently 'not real' units? how are they thin on power? You misread my musings on elegance as something exclusive to power, when I was saying that elegance IS power for this nation. And BL is the _best_ setup to use these units, much more so than Kailasa.

How are Siddhas the essence of mobility: "can be (almost) anywhere at anytime with (almost) no conditionals. bringing divine blesses and really good battle magic OR thug-ability", and BL has no combat magic? ("Hell, I can even jump into the middle of your empire, then jump back out to a border skirmish, then to my own empire to defend or recapture a raided province, then back into the middle of your empire" says the Siddha that pops into your mind, then back out again as easily as it arrived). I mean, once you've got these guys, the massive logistical problems that are, in fact, BL and Kail's main challenge is solved. And once again, BL is better situated to use Siddhas and higher end summons compared to Kailasa

That's only the tip of the Kail/BL toolbox...
and what other nation has that _type_ of toolbox?

People don't think of BL as a nation that must depend on its summons. They see Kail = Celestial summons and BL = Monkeys, and this is why Kailasa has had victories before BL.

As far as the track record goes... well... Kailasa had their FIRST victory only two months ago, and then their second right after that, two weeks ago. They went from off the bottom to average in a couple of months, and Dominions has been out for two years now.

As people are realizing where the strengths lie and how to unlock them, they will start to win. BL is a very similar nation to Kail, and perhaps almost more powerful (maybe, its a hard call). We will see victories soon...

[Kuritza]

So you are saying that most nations are equal in power?

I have heard claims that nations power matters little because its skill that makes you win. But strangely, these who claim such things tend to play extremly strong nations, such as Mictlan and LA Rlyeh.
If nations arent equal in power, then least powerful nations need most luck and skill. And thats true for Bandar Log.

[Endoperez]

Originally Posted by Kuritza

So you are saying that most nations are equal in power?

I wasn't trying to say anything, but trying to understand what you had meant. Most nations aren't grossly imbalanced, in either direction, and I doubt Bandar Log is too far down, personally.

On your original post, the tone suggested that you tried to belittle Bandar, but the arguments weren't spesific to them. I tried to point that out.

[Edratman]

I agree with Endoperez and Baalz.

What they are saying is that it isn't a stretch to play Bandar and win in MP. They can't can't be played using a strategy of "recruit and smash mouth", but they have the resources available to play with any nation if you know what you are doing.

That is the purpose of Baalz guide. It is not to convince you that Bandar is the absolute easiest, best nation.

[AreaOfEffect]

It is always important to avoid direct comparisons of vastly different units, such as elephants and tiger riders. I would not hesitate to choose elephants for initial expansion, but believe me, when it comes to war I would pick the tiger riders first. This goes double when I'm at war with a nation that uses fear effects or forces MR checks with their spells. This goes triple when I'm fighting Ry'leh. (Though I'd bring an elephant anyhow to absorb a few spells.)

Making direct comparisons between gandharvas and niefel giants is also not a fair comparison. Sacred units tend to have naturally higher moral scores. You put the gandharva at a disadvantage when putting them up against another sacred because their awe becomes almost irrelevant. The gandharvas also have a standard and infantry average move speed, which means they are army friendly and operate best by elevating your regulars. Niefel Giants operate best on their own. Niefel giants are also priced in comparison to giants, meaning they absorb the benefits of being a giant as a national advantage.

Back to what KO is saying, it is important to compare units of a nation to each other and not other nations. Otherwise you discount national weaknesses and strengths. If you compared every infantry unit to Mictlan's infantry then you would conclude that all solidly average units should be priced as 9 gold and not 10. This would cause you to completely miss the fact that Mictlan's national advantage is cheap humans soldiers. Bandar Log has a national disadvantage, which is that all of their units are animals. Give them a unit that isn't an animal, but rather a magic being, and you must account for it.

I don't like gandharvas as a national unit because I think it is unthematic. The point of Bandar Log is that the apes have come to stand on their own. It is the only ape nation that rules itself. The summons imply that the celestial beings now answer to them, not the other way around. If gandharvas are around and are revered by the monkeys then it would logically imply that a gandharva-like commander would naturally follow. Though a faction with gandharva-like commanders and sacreds fighting along side apes already exists, it's called Kailasa.

[Epaminondas]

AreaofEffect,

If that post was directed to me, you are already preaching to the (half-) converted. I acknowledged as much in my response to Kristoffer. He introduced an angle I did not sufficiently consider before.

Nonetheless, if you are trying to go to an immoderate lengths with the argument and simply say that cross-national comparisons ought not be made, period--well, then, I can't agree.

[AreaOfEffect]

Originally Posted by Epaminondas

AreaofEffect,

If that post was directed to me, you are already preaching to the (half-) converted. I acknowledged as much in my response to Kristoffer. He introduced an angle I did not sufficiently consider before.

Nonetheless, if you are trying to go to an immoderate lengths with the argument and simply say that cross-national comparisons ought not be made, period--well, then, I can't agree.

Don't get me wrong. I am not against making comparisons between nations in general. Nation-to-nation comparisons are always good in my book. What I'm saying is that unit-to-unit comparisons aren't very helpful. Also note that I feel even more strongly about this when the two units being compared fill completely different niches. Comparing a size 6 trampler to a sacred mounted unit and a standard bearer with awe against an ice giant are rather drastic comparisons to make.

My opinion is that you should make comparisons for the sake of game balance. However, those comparisons should be made by taking in the nation as a whole. Regular units, sacred units, commanders, province defense, priest power, magic paths, starting gems, pretender selection, national spells, extra dominion effects, castle types, and temple costs all have to be considered. It's not an easy comparison to make.

The purpose in the post is to express my concern that some comparisons were being made rather hastily and incorrectly. That comparisons were being made in a manner that didn't reveal much insight.

I'm glad you are half converted on this issue. I guess that means that I don't have much else to say. I just wanted to be clear that nation-to-nation comparisons are fine, though doomed to be skewed by personal opinion. Nothings perfect.

[JimMorrison]

Well AOE, perhaps I misspoke a bit, as I didn't mean to make a strictly direct comparison. I was mostly just trying to show how unless you are absolutely rolling in cash you can't spend, the tigers generally end up not being not entirely cost effective.

And really, I did not just compare them to elephants. I also compared them to White Ones. Unfortunately, Bandar Log has no other cavalry, certainly no other sacred cavalry, so what would be a better unit to compare to? I compared them to the other unit with a similar cost, and to the other sacred unit, I think that's all I could do, since we all seemed to agree it's not right to compare them to Oiorpata, for example.

I just hope that KO's agreement of my point on cost, wasn't a euphemistic, philosophical agreement. I will cross my fingers that we see a cost reduction of capital only units (not commanders) in the next patch - to encourage people to use their special national units more frequently.

<3