Kristoffer's encouragement thread - Page 5

RamsHead · #41 March 6th, 2007, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Meglobob said:

Quote:

K said:
Kristoffer, this game is fantastic. Anytime that someone asks for a downward "balance change", I'd like you to feel free to ignore them.

Can I second this.

So many people complain about 'balance' and this usually results in a unit, spell etc... being nerfed, made vastly inferior than it was. This happens time and time again until eventually the game does become 'balanced', in such a way that noone plays it anymore, cause its boring. I have seen so many good games spoiled this way.

*points to vampires*

Anyway, keep up the good work Kristoffer!

Edi · #42 March 6th, 2007, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Sombre said:
Edi: There's a mod which fixes bless.

Yeah, I know about that one. It's great thing to have in the interim but the actual issue needs fixing still. But now that the actual location of the problem is known, the fix shouldn't be too much work.

Edi

SelfishGene · #43 March 6th, 2007, 05:14 PM

What we need to fix vampires is a new tag and ability that gives them mistform for free by default (like glamour gives 1 mirror image).

Velusion · #44 March 6th, 2007, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Meglobob said:

Quote:

K said:
Kristoffer, this game is fantastic. Anytime that someone asks for a downward "balance change", I'd like you to feel free to ignore them.

Can I second this.

So many people complain about 'balance' and this usually results in a unit, spell etc... being nerfed, made vastly inferior than it was. This happens time and time again until eventually the game does become 'balanced', in such a way that noone plays it anymore, cause its boring. I have seen so many good games spoiled this way.

I've also seem games where balance was ignored and players simply stopped playing the game because unless you played a specific way you were at a distinct disadvantage.

Meglobob · #45 March 6th, 2007, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Velusion said: I've also seem games where balance was ignored and players simply stopped playing the game because unless you played a specific way you were at a distinct disadvantage.

Obviously this does not apply to Domnions as there are easily 100's of different ways to play/strategy's to try.

Gandalf Parker · #46 March 6th, 2007, 07:25 PM

It could if all of the games were small maps and 2-4 players with no VP.

Velusion · #47 March 6th, 2007, 07:48 PM

Eh, I can't bother to argue with fanboys that think Dominions3 is divinely perfect when it comes to balance. No point.

To Kris O - Dom3 is a great game and I hope you keep improving it!

Gandalf Parker · #48 March 6th, 2007, 08:02 PM

Or newbs stuck in one game type so they want everything tweaked to run perfectly in their style only.

But I agree that its a great game. (aint it cool that no matter what they all disagree with they can still all love the game?)

Beorne · #49 March 7th, 2007, 05:40 AM

Quote:

Meglobob said:
Can I second this.
So many people complain about 'balance' and this usually results in a unit, spell etc... being nerfed, made vastly inferior than it was. This happens time and time again until eventually the game does become 'balanced', in such a way that noone plays it anymore, cause its boring. I have seen so many good games spoiled this way.

I can't understand. All the nations are unabalanced, it is not a balanced game (and we love it for this too) but there are very very unbalanced nations, that would be in the "normal unbalance range" with very small tweaks ... and someone (all single player, I think) oppose to this. I can't understand the reason, seriously.

Meglobob · #50 March 7th, 2007, 06:07 AM

Quote:

Beorne said:

Quote:

Meglobob said:
Can I second this.
So many people complain about 'balance' and this usually results in a unit, spell etc... being nerfed, made vastly inferior than it was. This happens time and time again until eventually the game does become 'balanced', in such a way that noone plays it anymore, cause its boring. I have seen so many good games spoiled this way.

I can't understand. All the nations are unabalanced, it is not a balanced game (and we love it for this too) but there are very very unbalanced nations, that would be in the "normal unbalance range" with very small tweaks ... and someone (all single player, I think) oppose to this. I can't understand the reason, seriously.

I agree that if you zoom in on 1 nation vs another nation you will find inbalance between them. However, take a step back and look at all the nations in a particular age, you find its very, very cleverly balanced overall.

My MP experience has shown this to be true. For exmaple in MA, Bander Log can destory MA Ulm very, very easily, but MA Agartha can destroy Bander Log easily. Another example EA Helheim can destroy EA Marverni easily but struggles badly against EA Atlantis who in turn struggles against EA Oceania. If you take the nations overall there is a balance.

This was discussed on another thread and in Dom3 you have 'face hugging' (think Alien the movie, attacks the nearest thing straight away), nations such as EA Helheim, MA Ermor, every era Mictlan vs the non-face hugging nations such as EA T'ien Ch'i, MA Arco etc...

Other factors also have a big effect, a face hugger will do well on a small map, a non-face hugger will do well on a large map. Also low gem sites will favour a face hugger (who does not rely on magic as much), well high gem sites favours a non-face hugger. Same with easy to hard research.