Tip: Template for reducing late game MM hell

[Illuminated One]

Originally Posted by MaxWilson

Let me see if I'm understanding your point correctly: 4X games typically have Explore, Expand, Exploit, and Exterminate phases. Dominions has a more limited set of options for Exploit than MOM or MOO/MOO2.

1.) Site-search (costs mage time and/or gems, may permanently increase the gem-production of that province)
2.) Build forts (increases resource and gold output of that province, allows recruitment of national units)
2b.) Build labs/temples (may be necessary to allow you to exploit certain indy pop types and/or sites)
3.) Forge gem-generators

I think you're arguing that the options available to Exploit are so limited that eliminating #3 cripples the Exploit phase to the point where it's not really worth playing as a 4X game. Is that right?

Well, not exactly, although along these lines.
I think with large maps and an extremely long timeframe it should contain 4X mechanics, but it really lacks in the exploit field (but I don't think gem gens as they are now are a good replacement) - and just relying on the castles and sitesearching (I don't care so much about terminology but I'd see them as explore personally) it's better to play it as a pure "duel" game imo.
Even if your wannabe god is completely uninterested in building or shaping his empire - your gem income/magic access has a great effect on your battles. Like you're not going to use much earth magic with 5 e gems income total and many nations are just not flexible enough to really cope.

Well about castles I think the general consensus is just to build the cheapest researcher factory possible. 400 gold are much early on, but +30 gold after turn 50 isn't really much when 50 gem scs are running around.

[Juffos]

If you wish to reduce micromanagement by eliminating diplomacy, please don't. Limit it to ingame messages. Diplomacy is necessary for the weak nations to unite and counter the strong.

[Snacktime]

Why not just have the gems generated by clams and other items or units go to the national inventory rather than to the unit wearing the item, so as to avoid the gem MM?

[Squirrelloid]

Originally Posted by Snacktime

Why not just have the gems generated by clams and other items or units go to the national inventory rather than to the unit wearing the item, so as to avoid the gem MM?

Well, there are times you want the gems on the commander in question. Ok, not so much with fever fetish, but I could see bloodstone and clams used for such a purpose. Heck, *I've* used clams for such a purpose.

[Snacktime]

I agree that there are times you want the gems to appear on that commander, but I'd venture to say this is relatively uncommon, usually you just have a bunch of folks in your various castles holding the items to gem gen. losing that very minor tactical option would cause no balance issues that i can think of and have a pretty high return in terms of eliminating MM.

[Sombre]

Solutions which we ourselves cannot do aren't that useful though. I mean there are many ways the problem could theoretically be solved, but I don't think identifying them all makes sense.

[WraithLord]

Originally Posted by Juffos

If you wish to reduce micromanagement by eliminating diplomacy, please don't. Limit it to ingame messages. Diplomacy is necessary for the weak nations to unite and counter the strong.

Yes. What I listed are 3 items that are confirmed to increase MM and can be removed w/o a serious effect on balance/fun. It doesn't mean that all game must be w/o diplo, only that those that would be w/o diplo would have less MM. Or more precisely - less time spent on chats, mails, PMs etc so that turns process considerably faster.

Gem gens, the way they are currently, just plain suck in MM respect. Perhaps if it was possible to "curse" their income so that it can't be moved from the owning mage to the lab then they'd be ok (income only for battles). As they currently are they are tedious, boring, MM intensive and cause income inflation in end game.

Smaller maps and less nations clearly reduce MM.

[thejeff]

Of course, without diplomacy you have to spend more actual in-game time preparing to counter war from all your neighbors, not to mention relying even more heavily on managing scouts to get info you can't get from others.
(Not that you should rely entirely on diplomacy for defense, but you certainly don't guard a border with an ally as strongly as you'd have to if you didn't have a deal.)

[WraithLord]

Usually w/o diplo one concentrates on deterrence to avoid wars. It may actually be more reliable then NAPs. As I have seen once and again that in diplo games you'd get nations dog-piling the leader while in RAND that's a rare occurrence and even when it happens you'd see 2-3 smaller nations banding as opposed to much more in diplo games. Also, when you're smaller and weaker in diplo games you may easily get to end game while in RAND it will all be over much sooner (so the whole game is much shorter as well).

I speak from personal experience of playing both game types. For me removing diplo considerably shortens turn processing.
EDIT: Again, I'm not saying diplo is bad, not fun or what not. It's perfectly viable and I'll surely play diplo game in the future. However I think that games w/o diplo require considerably less time investment.

[Sombre]

Oh I should point out NI maps also greatly reduce micro, simply because there are far, far less commanders - most notably scouts you have to cycle through with n.