The MA Ulm issue.

[Velusion]

DrPraetorious said:

Suppose that if you have no forge bonuses, you can afford 10 items.

Well, if you have a 50% forge bonus, you can afford twice as many - twenty items.

If you have *two* 50% forge bonuses, you can afford four times as many - forty items.

Forge bonuses are better the more you have.

Let me address this and Baalz post:

#1 These bonuses don't stack. The forge ability direct stacks with the hammer - but it doesn't stack with the FotA. Lets leave off the hammer and use Pythium to compare to Ulm and see who really gets the biggest benifit from FotA.

A) Without FoTA Ulm pays 75% base cost. With FoTA Ulm pays %37 of base cost. Throw on a hammer with Forge and Ulm pays %25 of base cost.
B) Without FoTA Pythium pays 100% per item. With FoTA Pythium pays %50. Throw on a hammer with Forge and Pythium pays %37 of base cost.

Without Forge or Hammers Ulm is saving 25% more when forge wasn't up than Pythium. However that savings comparison drops to 12% once all the bonuses are applied.

#2. You better believe that Pythium wants as much SC equipment to outfit national Angels/SCs (something of which Ulm doesn't have) When you get down to 2-3 gems an item all of Pythium's forgers will be able to output items non-stop. Volume (except for the really expensive stuff) really isn't much of big deal).

#3. Does Ulm have a distinct advantage against all other nations when it comes to forging items without forge? Yes. Do they have a distinct advantage against all other nations when it comes to forging items with forge? Yes.

#4. Yes Ulm has a savings of 1 gem on small items over Pythium with the forge up. But they had just as big a savings BEFORE the forge got put up... so I don't see the advantage.

[Baalz]

Well, Pythium is arguably the strongest MA race, so lets leave angels out of this. With regards to FotA my point was to address your question of why Ulm benefited more than other nations under the forge. Using a very simplified example, assuming you're just forging 25 gems worth of 5 gem items per turn then investing gems in the FotA for most nations will net you an extra 7 items per turn, with Ulm it'll net you an extra 16. That's (significantly) more ROI for each gem put into the forge than most nations if you're counting it as items you can forge. I think your thinking is that it doesn't matter if it costs 1 gem or 2 I can still forge all I want...well, if you're summoning expensive angels end game you're probably right that you won't have much trouble keeping up with the forging, but if you're scrabbling to bootstrap your research on a modest gem income outputting triple the lightless lanterns is significant, and every gem you save is one more for summoning something to put the items on (with your pretender or indie mages). Heck, if you save 10 gems forging a full set of gear you just got a "free" Awaken Sleeper to stick it on. If you trade it away for even more profit, heck maybe you just netted a "free" golem. I understand where you're coming from re: them not having nearly as good uses for the items as some other nations which is a valid position, but to my mind tangential to the discussion of the benefit of the FotA. The forge gives more of a benefit to Ulm, being able to capitalize on it is a different issue (though as I said, I understand what you mean).

[Velusion]

Baalz said:I think your thinking is that it doesn't matter if it costs 1 gem or 2 I can still forge all I want...well, if you're summoning expensive angels end game you're probably right that you won't have much trouble keeping up with the forging, but if you're scrabbling to bootstrap your research on a modest gem income outputting triple the lightless lanterns is significant, and every gem you save is one more for summoning something to put the items on (with your pretender or indie mages).

Heck, if you save 10 gems forging a full set of gear you just got a "free" Awaken Sleeper to stick it on. If you trade it away for even more profit, heck maybe you just netted a "free" golem. I understand where you're coming from re: them not having nearly as good uses for the items as some other nations which is a valid position, but to my mind tangential to the discussion of the benefit of the FotA. The forge gives more of a benefit to Ulm, being able to capitalize on it is a different issue (though as I said, I understand what you mean).

And I understand what you mean (I can make 3-4x more of the same items than "nation X" with Ulm), but I disagree that that is more important that base gem cost savings. If Nation X and Ulm both need 20 lightless lanterns, Nation X is going to save more games by having the forge than Ulm would save.

If gems were only used on forging, then yes it would be a significant advantage - but beyond the early research boost there are only a set number of items really needed. Obviously the larger the game the more you need (perp comes to mind). Overall I think a non-ulm nation will reap a greater advantage to FotA due to raw gems savings in the vast majority of games.

[Ming]

I am late in joining this thread and most of what I wanted to say has already been said already. It seems that there is indeed a consensus that MA Ulm is too weak. Both the arbalest and black steel plate are of dubious value. However, no consensus on how to strengthen Ulm without changing its flavor as a non-magic nation has emerged. I would like to share my views on this as I hate to see Ulm lose its current flavor in the process of being strengthened.

I share many players’ view that the arbalest and black steel armour needs to be strengthened. My proposal would be to increase the precision of the arbalest to 3 (this should reduce casualty due to friendly fire significantly and make the opening volley more effective), change the crossbowman’s short sword to dagger (even a short sword is too much extra weight if one has to carry the heavy arbalest), and increase the total resource cost of the unit by 2. For black steel plate armour, simply reduce its encumbrance by one (this includes the forged black steel plate to make it more viable).

However, in my view MA Ulm’s true weakness does not lie in its arbalest or black steel armour, but in the lack of variety of its troops. It is easy for a human opponent to bypass Ulm’s strength (high protection but usually at the expense of low defense) while it is next to impossible for the Ulm player to adequately prepare for the many possible threats that could ruin its armies. My proposed “upgrade” for Ulm is relatively simple. Hence Ulm is always much stronger in SP than in MP. However, all that is needed to rectify this, in my opinion, is to change the standard equipment of its troops. Many of the standard equipment given to Ulm’s units are sub-optimal. Given that Ulm is a non-magic nation, it needs to be the strongest in non-magic units to compensate for its relative lack of magic abilities. So there should be no reason why it should not have access to the best non-magical weapons that is widely available to many nations and independents (eg. great swords and crossbows).

My recommended changes below would make Ulm difficult to beat on non-magical battles, but the key to beating Ulm is always through magical means and this remain the case. It strengthens Ulm considerably against independents but not overwhelming so since resource restrictions would limit the size of its army early on.

First of all, black plate infantry does not benefit much from shields. Its defense is so low that the shield parry can often be bypassed. So they should be given two handed weapons or ambidextrous ability.

Going through the list of MA Ulm’s recruitable units, I would recommend that the two battleaxe units should be equipped with great swords instead. The 2 extra resources needed for great swords are barely noticeable for Ulm but the increase in attack and defense will make a difference.

Ulm doesn’t need two flail carrying units. The Infantry of Ulm flail unit should be given crossbow and short sword instead and renamed crossbowman (the arbalest carrying unit should be renamed heavy crossbowman). This should become the main Ulm missile unit while the heavy crossbowman is to counter the likes of trolls. The Black Steel flail unit can remain as is (but has one less encumbrance due to change in the stat of the black steel plate).

The Infantry of Ulm hammer and shield units should be given broadsword and shields instead. The 2 extra defense comes in handy given the lower protection of the plate cuirass. The black steel hammer and shield unit should be given glaives instead. Alternatively, change it to a cavalry unit. Ulm can do with a cheaper and lighter cavalry unit for flanking and chasing down retreating enemies. Suggest one with same equipment and resource cost as a knight, the basic stat of Ulm infantry, and cost 40G.

Mauls are inferior to greatswords (or battleaxes) in every way and are therefore redundant. The resource saving is meaningless for Ulm. Suggest giving them ambidextrous 2 and 2 hammers instead.

The infantry of Ulm morning star and shield unit can stay as is (my favourite standard Ulm unit), but the black steel infantry should be given ambidextrous 2, Morningstar, and dagger instead.

The weapons of the pike units can stay as it.

The black knight unit is a problem. Its low defense (easily hit by an opponent’s lance) and 2 less action points makes it inferior to, say, Man’s cheaper knights in many respects. I would favour the Black Knight getting a black steel morningstar that has +1 attack (+2 in total) and +2 damage (+8 in total) for the cost of 5 extra resources. Also give it 18 damage to compensate for its 2 less action points so that its lance is as potent as other cavalry.

The sapper should have their crossbows replaced by bombs (range=strength, precision=minus 2, ammo=5, 10AP area one physical damage, and attacks every other turn). This is more in line with the theme of a sapper and gives Ulm more variety to its missile attacks.

Finally, the guardian should be given a new weapon, black steel halberd. This would have the same stat as the original halberd but does 2 extra damage and cost 5 extra resource.

As to the commanders, no need to have 2 chain mail and two black steel commanders with similar weapons. Suggest having one with identical equipment as the new crossbowman, one with identical equipment as the heavy crossbowman (arbalest), one broadsword, shield, and full chainmail, and one ambidextrous 2 with 2 hammers and full plate of Ulm. The engineer should be equipped with crossbows, and the Lord Guardian black steel halberd. This should give the Ulm player far more choices to suit different situations.

I deliberately leave Ulm weak against many of its traditional counters (AP and AN attacks, ethereal, etc.) to retain the original flavor of the nation. However, with my suggested changes the Ulm player can narrow down its problems and concentrate on those.

The above are just my personal view. Any comments or criticism are welcome.