Random Picks and Modding...

[Scott Hebert]

I doubt many of you remember me, but those that do might remember my rather silly passion for 'brute-forcing' certain things.

Well, I am currently trying to work out accurate gold costs for random picks on mages, using Illwinter's baseline as given on their website. I have discovered a rather unusual event.

It needs tweaking, but a general rule of thumb is that a fully random pick is worth 25g regardless of the mage's fixed picks. Elemental or Sorcery random picks are harder to quantify (at least, on mages that have both), but I hope to have those quantified soon.

Now, a few caveats regarding this. It assumes that the random pick is fully random; i.e., it can be any of the 8 paths, and it is not bound to any other random pick (such as in the case of Atlantis's Kings of the Deep). It also assumes that each of the 8 paths of magic are equally desirable. That is, Fire magic is no better than Air magic is no better than Death magic is no better than Astral magic. This is Illwinter's assumption on their site, and I have followed it.

What prompted this is the at-times rather obtuse pricing of mages in the game. Certain mages are drastically undercosted (High Seraphs, Circle Masters, Daughters of Avalon), while others are drastically overcosted (Master of the Five Elements, Pans). I hope the end result of my research will be a balance mod to redress this.

Something else that I hope to glean is the 'formula' for calculating the cost of commanders, beyond the very simple. I feel that I have a basic grasp of it, but the quantification of various 'specials' needs to be tightened.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. I will check when I can.

[tinkthank]

Hey, this looks very nice! -- but one word of warning, if I may: With a few exceptions (most notably: The Arch Seraph, who really could be a lot more expensive in my book), the over- and under-pricednicess of mages is not something which needs much, if any, fixing, because it is itself the result of balancing. "Balancing" the mage prices without drastically changing the rest of the nations -- in essence, creating a whole new game -- would make for disaster.

[Endoperez]

Illwinter has stated, that non-standardly priced mages are priced cheaper/more expensive on purpose. However, I still think your balance mod will help by adding an option to those who don't like the current pricing.

I don't remember your name, but I remember some of your threads and ideas... I was going to link your old thread about Exalted mod and the pricing of random magics that followed from it, until I noticed who started it all... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Welcome back!

[Chazar]

Sorry, but I think that this is futile: All these pricing rules can only be rules of thumb, to ensure that user-made mods are not too unbalanced!

It would be boring if all nations would be equal, hence e.g. Caelum is defined by its cheap mages as Ulm is defined by its superior Infantry. Once these basic difference have been decided, gaming balance is then an entirely different issue. Since Caelum has cheaper mages, other nations should have other advantager or caelum should have another disadvantage, but that is an entirely different topic for a different thread.

So establishing a rough gold cost estimate is useful for modders who do not have the experience and the a lot of test-gaming-time, but still want to add new thins to the existing game (assuming it is balanced). So apart from that, what is the point then?

[Scott Hebert]

I am aware that non-standard mages are supposedly there for 'balance purposes'... but having played the game for some time, I have to question this. Let's take for example the most likely culprit, the High Seraph of Caelum.

It is RIDICULOUSLY under-priced. As I recall, it is 3A2W1?, correct? By my calculations, the price for its magic ALONE is 257.75g. Then add the base price of 30g for a commander (though I'm working on refining that), and you get 287.75. Then, let's take into account that it flies, and is cold-immune. Say another 20. That's 300g.

Caelum gets this for 175g, instead.

Well, then, I would expect to see outstandingly bad troops for Caelum (ignoring, for the present, the fact that magic always outstrips troops). Well, they're certainly fragile, for the most part. However, that is to balance that nearly all of their troops fly, and naturally have magic weapons. What non-flying troops they have are quite good, so I don't see how Caelum's 'good mages' are balanced by their 'bad troops'.

Well, what about their priests? Maybe they just have no good priests? Nope. Their only priest(ess), the Seraphine, is Holy-3 AND Stealthy. No, you really can't say they have bad priests in the least.

Well, what about bad scales? Are they balanced there? You look, and no. Far from it, in fact. They want Cold-3, which is another way of saying that they get 120 free points. Now, even if 80, say, of those points go into upping their Pretender's Dominion so that they naturally spend time in their Dominion, that's still more points than the average nation gets, and that's a higher Dominion. As it is, Cold is better than Heat because most Undead/Underwater nations take it, so it's more likely to be a Cold world than a Hot one.

So, personally, I don't see where Caelum is all that hampered by other factors that they deserve to have a mage on the order of the High Seraph, that cheaply.

For myself, I do not think that the ideas espoused for balance should work that well. Balance each part of the game against themselves, and you end with a balanced game. Balance does NOT mean equal, though. Ulm has good troops, yes... except against Undead/Magic/Giants/Armor-Piercing attacks, etc. Ulm also has a good mage, if a limited one. (The Master Smith, by ANY calculation, is undercosted.)

In any event, if/when I release a mod for the mages in the game, people who don't feel there's an imbalance in the mages don't have to use it.

[Scott Hebert]

I have finished my analysis of random picks. The 'general rule' of 25g per pure random pick is rather borne out. It gets higher with more paths, and it seems to dip on the second random pick, but it's rather set, otherwise.

I will start working on an analysis of the commanders in the game, to see if I can 'pin down' at least some of the variables involved in it. Any suggestions as to how to do this would be appreciated.

[Saber Cherry]

Commander factors, in order of importance to me:

Free Summons (e.g. Unholy / Tribal King / Wolfherd)
Magic Command
Undead Command
Amphibious
Command
Flight
Stealth
Sailing
Immunities
Protection
Has a Shield
Strat Move over 2
Survival Skills (forest, waste, etc)
Longranged Weapon (eg composite bow)
HP
Precision
Magic Resist
Other assorted bonuses (Standard, Patrol, Pillage, NNE, etc)

[Scott Hebert]

Saber Cherry said:
Commander factors, in order of importance to me:



Ah, Saber Cherry. Greetings again. If I may comment...?


Free Summons (e.g. Unholy / Tribal King / Wolfherd)



Well, Unholy already has its calculation done for me (Illwinter). Personally, I think it's about right. Unholy-3 Priests can put out a lot of Longdead, but they pay 150g for the privilege.

Tribal Kings and Wolfherds, OTOH, show that just being able to produce chaff isn't all that expensive an ability.


Magic Command
Undead Command



Granted, this is important. I imagine it will be valued at twice the equivalent amount of 'normal' leadership. This of course does not include Leadership (of any type) gained by magic, since that (presumably) is included in the cost of the magic path.


Amphibious



Again, useful. On this note, how much do you think Strategic Movement should be valued?



Command



Leadership is referred to above.



Stealth
Sailing



Sailing is a movement enhancer and as such will be valued. Stealth... not so much. I'll explain more below.


Immunities



Do you think that all immunities should be equally valued?


Protection
Has a Shield



Unless someone can tell me otherwise, Weapons and Armor will be ignored in this analysis. The reason being is that is taken into account on resources, correct? Base (inherent) Protection values will be valued accordingly.

As a base, I am looking at the basic scout. All of its stats are 10, it has no Leadership, it has Stealth(+0), and that's about it. That would lead me to believe the following:

Commander: 10
Stats: 0
Leadership: 0
Stealth(+0): 10

For a grand total of 20 points.

Now, if you 'move up' to the standard infantry commander, he loses stealth, but gains Leadership 25. This might look like the following:

Commander: 10
Stats: 0
Leadership: 20
For a total of 30 points.

From these examples, you might be able to look at the following, for base leadership:

0 - 0 points
10 - 10 points
25 - 20 points
50 - 30 points
75 - 40 points
125 (Is 100 a valid base number?) - 50 points

Does this work out to about the right amount? I don't know yet. But it's my 'working guess'. As for stats, I'm going to assign positive/negative numbers based on most stats' deviation from 10 (Str, Att, Def, Prc, Mrl, MR). Protection will simply be its number. Encumbrance on its deviation from 3 (that seems to be the human norm), with probably a larger 'bonus' if it's 0. For HPs, currently it's just like Str, but it may need to be changed. Do you think that might work, or would it be overvaluing HPs?

I'll do some more work on it, and see what I can come up with.

Thanks for the feedback.

[Saber Cherry]

Interesting. I was not considering a scout to be a commander, since they have zero leadership. The points I included above were just things I consider important in recruiting leaders that will be leading my troops.

I know protection and shields are accounted for by resource cost, but shields are so critical that I would never recruit a commander with low protection and no shield at any resource cost unless it had special abilities (like magic paths) or was dirt cheap. Commanders without shields and armor die like flies when exposed to arrows... seeking arrows... blade winds... flying shards... well, anything, really.

Undead leadership can probably be valued similarly to or a bit more than normal leadership, since normal undeads are much weaker than humans, and devils are much stronger than humans.

Magical leadership, OTOH, I think is far more valuable per unit than normal leadership, not just double.

However, it is very rare to have a gold cost for commanders with undead or magical leadership that is not already paid for with their magic paths, so these points may be moot.

HPs on commanders (the kind that sit at the back of the army in battles, and just lead troops) are much more important than other stats (except protection and maybe MR). HP protects them from seeking arrows, strategic province-blasting spells, projectiles, and damage from auras of friendly units... which are the leading causes of commander death, in my experience. The other stats are usually useless except versus assassination attempts, weak fliers set to "attack rear", and very powerful commanders that you actually use in combat.

When evaluating commanders, it may be useful to have a scale for "pure commanders" in which stats (except hp,mr, and prot) are generally irrelevant, and a scale for "combat commanders" that are intended to actually fight, where all stats are valuable. After all... would anyone pay more for an indy commander that had +2 str, -1 enc, and +2 ap? I wouldn't... but if I had a choice between an indy commander with +5 HP or +5 str, I would certainly choose +5 HP. Precision is always worthless unless it is above 10 or on a leader that comes with a ranged weapon (or magic). Also...

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
0 - 0 points
10 - 10 points
25 - 20 points
50 - 30 points
75 - 40 points</pre><hr />

I seem to be more in favor of big armies than other people, but I find 50-leadership to be way better than 25-leadership, and 10-leadership to be virtually worthless. I'd probably scale it more like...

0 - 0 points
10 - 8 points
25 - 20 points
50 - 35 points
75 - 45 points

...but it depends on the way you like to design armies and what kind of units you use. Mictlan leadership isn't really as valuable as Jotun or Abysian leadership.

As far as strat moves go, all commanders have a minimum of 2 strat moves as far as I know. More strat moves are almost never useful UNLESS they are combined with flight, terrain survival, AND access to units with flight, terrain survival, and high strat moves. Strat moves are useless underwater. In fact, strat moves may be worthless for normal commanders, and only important for Caelian and combat commanders.

Immunities: They're all very valuable, and more so as the game goes on. Poison is probably the least valuable. The value of immunities increases drastically with the power of the unit, so that inherent fire immunity on a supercombattant is way more valuable than inherent fire immunity on an Abysian commander. Maybe you should make immunities multiplicative rather than additive. For example, Frost immunity could be worth 1.5x, making a Neifel Jarl worth (300 points)*1.5 and a Caelian scout worth (20 points)*1.5 or something like that.

Well, anyway, these are just some random thoughts I tapped in as I was considering commanders, but feel free to ignore them and value units however you want http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Scott Hebert]

Saber Cherry said:
Interesting. I was not considering a scout to be a commander, since they have zero leadership. The points I included above were just things I consider important in recruiting leaders that will be leading my troops.



*nods* Understood. However, I am trying for an 'across-the-board' approach to Leader design, and the Scout is the simplest in terms of number of variables free.


I know protection and shields are accounted for by resource cost, but shields are so critical that I would never recruit a commander with low protection and no shield at any resource cost unless it had special abilities (like magic paths) or was dirt cheap. Commanders without shields and armor die like flies when exposed to arrows... seeking arrows... blade winds... flying shards... well, anything, really.



Again, understood, and I'll look into it, but it's not something I'll be too concerned over. The hoped-for 'end result' of this analysis is to find out exactly where/why certain commanders have such high costs.


Undead leadership can probably be valued similarly to or a bit more than normal leadership, since normal undeads are much weaker than humans, and devils are much stronger than humans.

Magical leadership, OTOH, I think is far more valuable per unit than normal leadership, not just double.



*nods* However, inherent leadership of either type is rare enough that double sounds about right. I mean... I can recall the other day I was playing Broken Empire Ermor, and I Prophetized my original Centurion... and he got Undead General for his heroic ability. That felt like a hat trick. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif


However, it is very rare to have a gold cost for commanders with undead or magical leadership that is not already paid for with their magic paths, so these points may be moot.



Rather. OTOH, it's most relevant to R'lyeh.


HPs on commanders (the kind that sit at the back of the army in battles, and just lead troops) are much more important than other stats (except protection and maybe MR). HP protects them from seeking arrows, strategic province-blasting spells, projectiles, and damage from auras of friendly units... which are the leading causes of commander death, in my experience. The other stats are usually useless except versus assassination attempts, weak fliers set to "attack rear", and very powerful commanders that you actually use in combat.



Ah. So, commanders like Pans and Triton Kings (which I feel are rather overpriced) should be more expensive simply because they have lots of HPs when compared to 'human' mage commanders?


When evaluating commanders, it may be useful to have a scale for "pure commanders" in which stats (except hp,mr, and prot) are generally irrelevant, and a scale for "combat commanders" that are intended to actually fight, where all stats are valuable. After all... would anyone pay more for an indy commander that had +2 str, -1 enc, and +2 ap? I wouldn't... but if I had a choice between an indy commander with +5 HP or +5 str, I would certainly choose +5 HP. Precision is always worthless unless it is above 10 or on a leader that comes with a ranged weapon (or magic).



I understand that, but commanders don't seem to be 'optimized' for that. I'd rather not go into 'generic commander', 'mage', and 'fighting commander'. It's basically subjective as to what, exactly, those are. Take a Vanherse. Is that a generic commander? (If he commands nothing but stealthy troops, maybe!) Is that a mage? (If he's spamming Phantasmal troops/False Horrors, maybe!) Is that a combat commander? (If he's decked out appropriately, maybe!) It's a judgement call, and one I hope to obviate.


Also...

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
0 - 0 points
10 - 10 points
25 - 20 points
50 - 30 points
75 - 40 points</pre><hr />

I seem to be more in favor of big armies than other people, but I find 50-leadership to be way better than 25-leadership, and 10-leadership to be virtually worthless. I'd probably scale it more like...

0 - 0 points
10 - 8 points
25 - 20 points
50 - 35 points
75 - 45 points

...but it depends on the way you like to design armies and what kind of units you use. Mictlan leadership isn't really as valuable as Jotun or Abysian leadership.



Well, that's the tweaking stage. Re: Mictlan vs. Jotun, though... I'm trying to avoid that kind of nation vs. nation idea. OTOH, Mictlan NEEDS their Leadership. Abysia and Jotunheim can sort of 'get away' with lower Leadership ratings (because of their pound-for-pound better troops), but Mictlan needs to be able to mass troops.

However, that tends to be a wash. Mictlan spends more money for their commanders (due to higher Leadership ratings), but their units are dirt-cheap, both in gold and resources. Conversely, Jotunheim spends less money for their commanders (due to lower Leadership ratings), but their units are more expensive. This is the sort of balancing that is beyond the current scope of my analysis.


As far as strat moves go, all commanders have a minimum of 2 strat moves as far as I know. More strat moves are almost never useful UNLESS they are combined with flight, terrain survival, AND access to units with flight, terrain survival, and high strat moves. Strat moves are useless underwater. In fact, strat moves may be worthless for normal commanders, and only important for Caelian and combat commanders.



*nods* I was expecting to simply ignore it. Strategic move on the units themselves are much more valuable at the 2+ level, so I've noticed.


Immunities: They're all very valuable, and more so as the game goes on. Poison is probably the least valuable. The value of immunities increases drastically with the power of the unit, so that inherent fire immunity on a supercombattant is way more valuable than inherent fire immunity on an Abysian commander. Maybe you should make immunities multiplicative rather than additive. For example, Frost immunity could be worth 1.5x, making a Neifel Jarl worth (300 points)*1.5 and a Caelian scout worth (20 points)*1.5 or something like that.



Mm, it's an idea, and I understand where you're coming from, but it does have its own uses. I mean, Abysian mages are completely immune to Fires from the Sky and similar spells, for example. I think I'll keep them all even, and see where it goes from there.


Well, anyway, these are just some random thoughts I tapped in as I was considering commanders, but feel free to ignore them and value units however you want http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif



Heh. I ignore advice at my own peril, I think. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[Agrajag]

Just a tiny little thing I wish to say, I think you should make all calculation by multiplying.
That is, for a fighting commander, 100 HP and 20 Attack will be much more valuable than two commanaders, one with 20 attack and one with 100 HP.
So the higher your stats, the better your other stats become, because with the improvement of one stat you increase the usability of the other (increasing HP to 100 as an example, will mean that that commander will live ~10 times more than an ordinary commander, thus making all of his abilities much more useful).

[Ighalli]

I strongly agree with Agrajag about multiplicitive values. The problem with that is weighing the various stats (not to mention abilities) and then normalizing them (to go from the product to the price). The additive math is definately easier, but it should be obvious that a mage assassin is worth more than an assassin and a mage.

[Chazar]

On the other hand, why should a higher attack value make a fragile seraph (having a high cost by these calculations) even more expensive? I doubt that the attack value can be ever high enough to be of a use for most mages...

[Agrajag]

Chazar said:
On the other hand, why should a higher attack value make a fragile seraph (having a high cost by these calculations) even more expensive? I doubt that the attack value can be ever high enough to be of a use for most mages...


This would be a problem in the additive as well as the multiplicitive system which can easily be solved by applying "factors" for what is important for what each kind of unit (so you divide strength by 10 for a mage because it is almost completely useless for him, as an example).
The factors will be difficult to calculate though and increase the effort required by quite a bit (and or opposite to the original idea which was an absolute value for stats rather than one dependent on unit type.

[Scott Hebert]

Ighalli said:
I strongly agree with Agrajag about multiplicitive values. The problem with that is weighing the various stats (not to mention abilities) and then normalizing them (to go from the product to the price). The additive math is definately easier, but it should be obvious that a mage assassin is worth more than an assassin and a mage.



I disagree, and for a number of reasons. First, on the 'mage assassin' &gt; 'mage' plus 'assassin'... why is that true? Yes, a mage assassin has more options than either a mage or an assassin (and thus should cost more), but if I have a mage and an assassin, and you have a mage assassin, you can only assassinate OR research/forge/ritualize/do magey stuff. I can do both (if not as well as the assassin mage).

For me, the 'opportunity cost' of having multiple commanders has to be worth something. (It's sort of an application of the chess idea of the 'overused piece'.)

Now, should they be equal? IOW, would the mage+assassin's cost equal the assassin mage's cost? Probably not. Even if the mage and the assassin mage had the same magic skills, and the assassin and the assassin mage had the same combat skills, the assassin mage most likely would not cost as much as the assassin and the mage combined, due to some overlap in other abilities. For example:

Assassin: 30g
Mage: 60g
Assassin/Mage: 80g

(These are 'off the top of my head', but the Void Child of R'lyeh, compared with a regular assassin or a 1-path mage, seems to bear this out.)

And yes, it's true that I can only buy one commander a turn, but look at the difference in upkeep should I buy one assassin and one mage, vs. two assassin/mages.

There are all kinds of permutations, but I don't see where a multiplicative system, as opposed to an additive system, is any more appropriate. Perhaps you can give examples of certain abilities that are better on 'better' commanders?

[Scott Hebert]

Agrajag said:

Chazar said:
On the other hand, why should a higher attack value make a fragile seraph (having a high cost by these calculations) even more expensive? I doubt that the attack value can be ever high enough to be of a use for most mages...


This would be a problem in the additive as well as the multiplicitive system which can easily be solved by applying "factors" for what is important for what each kind of unit (so you divide strength by 10 for a mage because it is almost completely useless for him, as an example).
The factors will be difficult to calculate though and increase the effort required by quite a bit (and or opposite to the original idea which was an absolute value for stats rather than one dependent on unit type.



This is more or less correct. A 'pure mage's' attack and strength stats are basically worthless. Unfortunately, that's not really inside my purview. (I.e., it's not my fault that attack and strength factor so little into magic.) Besides, if it were abnormally high, it would stand to reason that you could, theoretically, make some sort of combat commander out of them.

However, this is more or less a moot point, because 'pure mages' generally have low (normal) combat stats.

Perhaps I need to be clearer in what I intend to do. I do not plan to create a system to value commanders, and then 'pigeonhole' all the commanders into that system. I intend to attempt to discover a system that gives the large majority of commanders an accurate gold cost, and then apply that, to see which commanders are over/undercosted.

Any attempt to apply different standards to different commanders will require a subjective apportioning of the commanders into different roles that I feel could jeopardize the larger work.

[Agrajag]

Scott Hebert said:
Perhaps you can give examples of certain abilities that are better on 'better' commanders?


Just as a simple example, take this none-existing unit:
HP 1
Attack 30
Defence 1
Strength 30
Protection 1
AP 30
and this unit:
HP 16
Attack 16
Defence 16
Strength 16
AP 16

According to the additive system, both are exactly the same, while it is obvious that the second is a much better unit.
as another example you can take the first unit and up its HP, Defence and Protection to 30, according to the additive system that unit is now almost twice as strong as before, but according to the multiplicitive system it is 27000 times better, which IMO is a better represntation. (Okay, I realize 27000 is a bit too high, but you can scale down the results to recieve more normal values.)

[Scott Hebert]

I see where you're coming from, but (IMO) I don't think I have to worry about it. After all, I doubt anyone is going to try to make the first unit, right?

And then again, there's always extenuating circumstances. Give that 30 Att, 30 Str guy Etherealness and Luck, and... well, his low def/prot/hp was just mitigated to a large degree.

I'm not saying your example isn't instructive, but do you have an example from the game that is this distorted?

[Endoperez]

Would these values be counted before or after adjusting the equipment? As an example, Ulmish Lord Guardian will get prot 20 but -8 or so def with his equipment.

[Oversway]

One commander factor that I don't see mentioned (but may have missed) is slots. Maybe it doesn't matter so much since most commanders have either humanoid or horseman slots.

Does the mounted tag seem to be factored into the cost in the regular game? Perhaps it is that mounted commanders also have other good stats, but they always seem rather expensive.

[Scott Hebert]

Agrajag said:

Just as a simple example, take this none-existing unit:
HP 1
Attack 30
Defence 1
Strength 30
Protection 1
AP 30



All right. Using my current formula:

HP 1 -9 (remember, base of 10)
Att 30 20 (same as above)
Def 1 -9
Str 30 20
Prot 1 1 (assuming base prot)
AP (I don't have much to figure in for this yet... this will probably be taken care of by the 'mounted' tag and a few other things.)

So that comes to 23 points.


and this unit:
HP 16
Attack 16
Defence 16
Strength 16
AP 16



HP 16 6
Att 16 6
Def 16 6
Str 16 6

This comes to 24 points. Yes, that seems to be about the same. I think the fault lies in the negatives (that is, values below 10), as they have a greater impact than positives. Still, I could try to come up with a progressive system that takes this into account. Unfortunately, I think it would have a lot more 'end math' needed to get it to the point where it could be applied to something like gold cost.


According to the additive system, both are exactly the same, while it is obvious that the second is a much better unit.
as another example you can take the first unit and up its HP, Defence and Protection to 30, according to the additive system that unit is now almost twice as strong as before,



Well, you didn't list the protection of the second unit at all. If you're referring to base protection, increase the second unit's cost by 16 (making it 40 to 23). Now, if you have a hypothetical unit of 'all 30s', you'd have:

HP 30 20
Att 30 20
Def 30 20
Prot 30 30

I get 90 for this. As compared to 40. A little higher than twice. Now, if you assume a base of 0 prot (i.e., their protection comes from armor), you have 60 to 24. That is a 2.5x difference.

Is it foolproof? Probably not. However, I think my method will be a good 'rule of thumb'. At the present, I also only plan to use this with commanders, not troops. That makes an additive system IMO a slightly better idea. (Commanders get slots to use magic items. This tends to 'even out' things, especially for combat builds.)

[Scott Hebert]

Endoperez said:
Would these values be counted before or after adjusting the equipment? As an example, Ulmish Lord Guardian will get prot 20 but -8 or so def with his equipment.



AFAIK, equipment only has a resource cost, not a gold cost, and so equipment is ignored when calculating this (all base stats).

Since commanders can have magic items anyway, this is probably the 'best' way of going about it.

[Scott Hebert]

Oversway said:
One commander factor that I don't see mentioned (but may have missed) is slots. Maybe it doesn't matter so much since most commanders have either humanoid or horseman slots.



I do plan to see whether or not slots make a difference. Again, the horseman 'bootless' issue will be wrapped up in the mounted tag.


Does the mounted tag seem to be factored into the cost in the regular game? Perhaps it is that mounted commanders also have other good stats, but they always seem rather expensive.



As mounted seems to increase AP in combat (and its encumbrance avoidance), I do intend to evaluate commanders on their 'mountedness'.

[Scott Hebert]

Well, I have looked into Abysia. Perhaps it was not the best one to start with, but it may help matters. I'm still trying to 'tweak' the leadership numbers, but here's how it currently stands:

0 - 0
10 - 5
25 - 10
50 - 15
etc.

That's for normal leadership. Undead leadership costs twice base, magical leadership triple base.

Anyway, here are the 'breakdowns' for each Abysia (base theme) commander, for stats, leadership, and magic.

Slayer:
Commander: 10
Stats: 19
Leadership: 0
Magic: 0
Total: 29

Warlord:
Commander: 10
Stats: 18
Leadership: 15
Magic: 0
Total: 43

Beast Tamer:
Commander: 10
Stats: 16
Leadership: 20
Magic: 0
Total: 46

Anathemant Salamander:
Commander: 10
Stats: 8
Leadership: 10
Magic: 140
Total: 168

Anathemant Dragon:
Commander: 10
Stats: 11
Leadership: 10
Magic: 300
Total: 331

Warlock Apprentice:
Commander: 10
Stats: 4
Leadership: 5
Magic: 110
Total: 129

Warlock:
Commander: 10
Stats: 6
Leadership: 5
Magic: 257.5
Total: 278.5

Demonbred:
Commander: 10
Stats: 24
Leadership: 35
Magic: 200
Total: 269

Now, we have some assorted 'bennies' to hand out to the Abysians. They ALL have Heat (and thus Fire Immunity) and Wasteland Survival. In fact, that is all that the Warlord/Anathemants/Warlocks have left. Looking at the Anathemants, a cost of 30 seems to be 'about right' for Heat and Wasteland Survival.

Survival seems a weak ability, so 5 points sounds about right. That leaves 25 points for Heat. Exactly how that splits up (Heat by itself vs. the Fire Immunity... probably thinking 20 for Immunity), I'm not concerned yet. In any event, that seems to work there, so adding...

Slayer:
Subtotal: 19
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 49

Warlord:
Subtotal: 43
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 73

Beast Tamer:
Subtotal: 46
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 76

Anathemant Salamander:
Subtotal: 168
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 198

Anathemant Dragon:
Subtotal: 331
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 361

Warlock Apprentice:
Subtotal: 129
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 159

Warlock:
Subtotal: 278.5
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 308.5

Demonbred:
Subtotal: 269
Heat: 25
Survival: 5
Total: 299

Okay. The Warlord comes out more expensive than in the actual game, but the Beast Trainer and the Anathemants are more or less right on, as far as costs go. (Commander costs always seem to be rounded to the nearest multiple of 5.) The Warlock Apprentice and the Warlock are also a little overcosted, but they are capital-only, and so that may or may not be important. (I may have gotten the Warlock's magic calculation wrong as well, so I'm going to recheck that.)

The Beast Trainer supposedly has Animal Awe, but I doubt that really makes much of an impact, and so it's 0. Judging from the Slayer, Assassin (and Stealthy +5 to go with it) seems worth 30 points, so that's what I'm using there. As for the Demonbred, he's the real oddball. He's already over his 'normal' cost, and I haven't adjusted for Flying yet.

Anyway, I might take a look at Blood of Humans, and maybe Pythium, and get back to you guys some refinements.

[The_Tauren13]

I would give the captiol only guys -10% or so simply because they are cap only. Makes sense that capitol only mages should be cheaper, as they are 'exclusive'.

[Saber Cherry]

You need to factor in "Sacred." It reduces upkeep by 50%, so I would make it multiplicative (x1.5 to x1.75). I would certainly pay 1.5x to get "sacred" on a mage that will be around for a while, and that doesn't even include bless effects (air shield, lightning resistance, quickness, reinvigoration, twist fate... wow!)

[Turin]

Why is magical leadership so costly? There aren´t that many magic troops around which require huge amounts of magic leadership.
In fact the only one I see massed are mechanical men.

Undead and even regular leadership are far more important most of the time.

[Scott Hebert]

The_Tauren13 said:
I would give the captiol only guys -10% or so simply because they are cap only. Makes sense that capitol only mages should be cheaper, as they are 'exclusive'.



Normally, I factor in a 20% reduction, but I'm not going to mess with that until later.

[Saber Cherry]

Turin said:
Why is magical leadership so costly? There aren´t that many magic troops around which require huge amounts of magic leadership.



That's why it is costly. With undead leadership, you NEED huge amounts for it to be useful, so it is cheap. With magic leadership, even 5 points can be highly effective, so it is valuable. Generally, magic leadership is already paid for by path cost, but sometimes it is separate (magic leaders, Illithids, Salamander trainers, etc).

[Scott Hebert]

Saber Cherry said:
You need to factor in "Sacred." It reduces upkeep by 50%, so I would make it multiplicative (x1.5 to x1.75). I would certainly pay 1.5x to get "sacred" on a mage that will be around for a while, and that doesn't even include bless effects (air shield, lightning resistance, quickness, reinvigoration, twist fate... wow!)



As I found out in an earlier analysis, sacred commanders have no cost increase over other commanders. At least, those that are priests have absolutely no cost increase over other commanders. The rare few that are not priests probably do have a cost increase.

It's rather counter-intuitive, but every single priest's cost would skyrocket if you added an extra 50% to his cost.

Really. Just tote up the magic costs on any mage out there, add 30, and you'll see that there's no extra charge for sacred commanders. I believe the Shaman is the sole exception.

As a counter-example, I offer the Daughter of Avalon.

[Graeme Dice]

Saber Cherry said:
With undead leadership, you NEED huge amounts for it to be useful, so it is cheap.



Undead leadership also applies to leading demons, which is why it's so valuable.

[The_Tauren13]

Are you sure priest costs dont already take into account being sacred? I would think 3 magic paths is alot better than 3 priest paths, so if a level 3 priest costs just as much as a level 3 mage, I would hope hes sacred.

[Scott Hebert]

The_Tauren13 said:
Are you sure priest costs dont already take into account being sacred? I would think 3 magic paths is alot better than 3 priest paths, so if a level 3 priest costs just as much as a level 3 mage, I would hope hes sacred.



For myself, I think it does include it. A Holy-3 priest costs 50. 2 in a magic path (which is the equivalent) costs 90 for the first, 60 for the second. Therefore, it is quite inexpensive.

[BigDaddy]

Warlords are more expensive because they are ambidextrous.

[Scott Hebert]

BigDaddy said:
Warlords are more expensive because they are ambidextrous.



Actually, that would push their cost in the wrong direction. Any unit or commander that has 2 or more weapons gets ambidextrous. I cannot see a way to quantify it. Well, I can, but it 'messes up' the math.

Basically, I already have the Warlord costing 15g more than he does. If I add in his ambidextrous ability (at 1.5-2 per point), he'd be about 80g instead of 60g.

The same point could be made about the Slayer.

[The_Tauren13]

Where are you seeing 50 gold for holy 3? For C'tis its 120, for Caelum its 90 ( yes he has flight and is stealthy, but all Caelum commanders are cheaper then they are worth, including the seraphine ), for Machaka 90, and for Jotunheim its 200!

Seems more like its 50 for holy 2, but like 90 for holy 3,

[Scott Hebert]

From Illwinter's site, Holy-2 is worth 20, Holy-3 is worth 50, and Holy-4 is worth 150. This is what I use.

As for the different costs of different commanders that have Holy-2/3/what-have-you, one of the primary reasons I am going through this analysis is to find out why they are costed differently.

[Scott Hebert]

All right, overnight I have been working through quite a few more of the Commanders. I am done through Ulm (all versions). First, I will list what specials I've encountered, and the costs that seem to approach what fits the observed data.

Heat (including 100% Fire Resistance): 25
Elemental Resistance: 1/10% (100% would be 10)
Survival (any): 5
Amphibious: 10
Sacred (without priest): 20 (guesstimate)
Communion Slave: 20
Mounted: 40 (yeah, go fig)
Cold Blooded: -5
Stealth(0)/Scout: 10
Spy: 20 (incl. Stealth(25-30))
Assassin: 30 (incl. Stealth(5))
Glamour: 15 (probably undercosted)
Recuperation: 5
Forge(25): 10
Drain Immunity: 10
Siege(x): 2x
Defense(x): 2x
Standard(x): .5x
Inquisitor: 10
Summon Wolves: 10
Fortune: 20

All right. I'm going to list commanders by nation/theme, and their 'calculated values', and 'actual values'. Comments will be held until after each nation/theme.

Blood of Humans:

Abysian Commander,43,35
Newt,88,80
Sanguine Acolyte, 88, 100
*Sanguine Anathemant,218,220

Re: Newt vs. Sanguine Acolyte, they seem like they're about 90g. I think Illwinter decided to give an equal disparity (one goes to 80, the other to 100) to sort of differentiate them.

Atlantis:

Atlantian Scout,32,20
Shambler Chief,51,50
Consort,92,80
Coral Queen,241,230
King of the Deep,287.5,290
*Initiate of the Deep,49,60
*Deep Seer,233,180

The Deep Seer is clearly anomalous. This I do not find to be indicative of an issue with my methods, as the Deep Seer, going from a simplistic 30g+210g (magic) would cost 240g.

Pythium(base):

Scout,20,20
Assassin,54,60
Centurion,26,30
Emerald Lord,50,80
Serpent Lord,74,130
Theurg Communicant,47,50
Battle Deacon,47,90
Theurg Acolyte,63,90
Theurg,190,150
Arch Theurg,416.25,380
Hydra Tamer,42,55

The Emerald Lord, Serpent Lord, and Battle Deacon seem to be badly overcosted (which comes as no surprise), while the Theurg and Arch-Theurg are undercosted (again, no real surprise). Something I am noticing is that my method consistently undercosts 1-path mages. Mainly it's because I am trying to 'work out' the 'base 30 cost' that Illwinter lists for commanders.

Pythium Serpent Cult:

Serpent Acolyte,66,80
Serpent Priest,209,190

Man:

Forester,27,25
Castellan,31,30
Monk,44,30
Bard,78,75
Lord Warden,85,130
*Daughter of Avalon,128,80
*Mother of Avalon,163,130
*Crone of Avalon,292.5,230

As expected, the Females of Avalon are highly discounted. The Lord Warden is about as bad the other way. As a note, Sacred on commanders really cannot be valued at more than 20 points, because at that point the commander may as well have Holy-2, which gives Sacred for free.

Man Last of the Tuatha:

Sidhe Champion,140,140
Sidhe Lord,277,280
Tuatha,430.5,390

Glamour being 15 points came from these guys, as it made the Sidhe Champion and Sidhe Lord come out right. Somehow, I thought it would be worth more...

Ulm:

Spy,30,30
Commander of Ulm(any),32,30
Black Lord,79,130
Master Smith,156,140
Siege Engineer,55,50
Priest,29,50 (note: this is the base priest)
*Lord Guardian,47,80

Iron Faith Ulm:

Black Acolyte,28,40
Black Priest,138,140

Black Forest Ulm:

Commander of Ulm,21,40
Ranger Captain,33,45
Illuminated One,61,80
Member of the Second Tier,143,160
Wolfherd,46,50
Fortunteller,89,90

That's through Ulm. I'm going out of town this weekend, so I may not be able to update, but I hope to get the rest of the national comanders done by late next week.

If anyone has any questions or comments about the calculated values, ask and I'll go through it for any issues.

[BigDaddy]

There may be some kind of capital only bonus. It seems like the best non-magic guys get a penalty. Emerald Lords, Black Lords, Lord Guardians. I'm not sure why this is, because I would personally like to see more thugs, always more thugs. And then obviously races be various specific bonuses as well (like the daughters of avalon).

[Scott Hebert]

I would agree on the non-magic part. Not so sure with the rest. Even with a 20% reduction in price for capital-only (which is more than most are willing to give, I believe), the Daughter of Avalon is 20g over her actual price.

[johan osterman]

Scott Hebert said:
From Illwinter's site, Holy-2 is worth 20, Holy-3 is worth 50, and Holy-4 is worth 150. This is what I use.
...

These are intended to be read as on top of the commander cost. Landing type 2 priests in the 40-50 range, and type 3 priests 80-90 etc.

[Scott Hebert]

I understand, Johan. What I am doing is the following:

Example: base priest

Infantry: 10 (This is the cost to be an infantry commander. It presumes you are straight 10s in combat stats, Encumbrance of 3, base protection of 0, with no Leadership, Magic, or Specials.)

HP(9): -1 (HP, like most stats, are assumed to be a base of 10. If you deviate from that, you cost more/less depending on it.)

Prot(0): 0
Mrl(10): 0
MR(13): 3
Enc(4): -1
Str(9): -1
Att(7): -3
Def(7): -3
Prc(10): 0

Totaling the stat points, I get -6.

Leadership(10): 5

As stated above, a Normal Leadership of 10 is worth 5 points.

Magic(HH): 20

This is right off of Illwinter's site. The Priest has no 'Specials', so totaling:

Infantry: 10
Stats: -6
Leadership: 5
Magic: 20
Total: 29

Does this match Illwinter's projected cost for a Priest? No, it doesn't. OTOH, it may be more fair. As it stands, a Priest is good for a few things:

1. Building temples, preaching, and banishing undead. This is presumed to be part of the 20-pt. cost for a Holy-2 person.

2. Moving troops around. Unfortunately, a commander that won't die to the first attack from a militia and that can move more troops, costs the same (by this formula).

Basically, I feel that in cases such as this, charging 30g for a body that simply cannot fight (or even stand up in a fight) is too much. 10 is much more reasonable.

One of the main purposes of this exercise is to find where the balance points are in commander creation. Armed with the results of this exercise, I plan to do a 'rebalance' mod similar to Saber Cherry's, except apply it to the commanders, across the board.

[Oversway]

What is encouraging so far is that the results of your cost formula tends to echo what other players mention as under- and over-priced units. Very cool.

[Scott Hebert]

I had noticed that myself. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif Well, I want to play with BF Ulm a little more, and then I'll work on some of the other nations.

[Huzurdaddi]

Scott,

the price for the preist you calculated may be very close to the actual cost of the preist since you did not include the cost multipler for sacred. I don't know what that multipler is ( somewhere between x1.5 and x2.0 ). But if it was half way between those two points x1.75 you get a cost of 50.75 which is perfect!

[Scott Hebert]

Huzurdaddi,

Yes, that would fix it... but would break all the other priests.

An Anathemant Salamander would be 300g with that multiplier. An Anathemant Dragon 540g. Etc. etc.

If someone can show me where a priest is not sacred, I might try to work it into the costs somewhere. Until then, I'm going to keep working on this, and then try to analyze everything 'at the end'.

I'm much more inclined to think that a priest is balanced at 30 than to try to apply arcane formulae so that his cost comes out to 50.

[Verjigorm]

Wuldn't holiness be taken into account by the H2 cost similar to the bonus abilities given to other magical disciplines? Illwinter's site says (in general) it is a 50% increase. Look at Pythium's Theurg however:

The Theurg costs 150gp/1rp and has magic paths of A, W, S2, H3. Ordering the paths from highest to lowest we get:
Basic Commander Price: 30gp
S2: 1st Path, level 2 = +90gp
W: 2nd Path, level 1 = +20gp
A: 3rd Path, level 1 = +10gp
-----
150gp
But wait a minute!
H3: Holy Priest = +50gp

So the Arch Theurg (according to Illwinter's scheme) gets H3 for free--not including the 50% sacred cost increase.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/confused.gif

[Saber Cherry]

Living Ermor has non-sacred priests.

[Verjigorm]

I see... If you see where I am going with the example above, there are many instances in the game where units are given substantial cost bonuses, regardless. Most Holy units are sacred, but few take into account the cost increase for sacredness, and some do not even take into account the actual cost of Holy magic--cite also the Monk, cost 30gp, H2; that is unless, the Monk's "body" as Scott mentions is worth only 10gp and then, his sacredness is still free OR included with the cost of H2.... That still leaves the conundrum of units like the Theurg.

[Graeme Dice]

Verjigorm said:That still leaves the conundrum of units like the Theurg.



Well, theurgs are cheap because they can't really accomplish much without a large set of communicants backing them up. Theurgs and arch theurgs have base encumbrances that are extremely high for most spellcasters as it is assumed that you will have many communicants around.

[Verjigorm]

If you take a look at the Arch Theurg, note that:
H4 = 150gp
S3 = 150gp
A2 = 60gp
W = 10gp
? = 10gp
----------
= 380gp

Thus he has likely paid for H4, and he has 2 more points of basic encumbrance than the Theurg. He has received, apparently, a discount for his random book and doesn't have to pay for his body. Removing H4 cost:
S3 = 150gp
A2 = 60gp
W = 10gp
? = ?20gp?
----------
= 240gp
* 1.5
----------
= 360gp

Assuming his body cost ~13gp, we get 380gp, so he could have paid for sacredness instead, but not both. Communion in combat is not the only factor, either, as Arch Theurgs can be very powerful ritual casters. I'm not fond of outside-the-norm unit comparisons (they tend to be ludicrously exaggerated), but, I could have a unit with Enc 50 with paths of 3F3E3~? ( ~? = Linked full random) who would be extraordinarily useful in ritual, but almost useless in combat. How much does he cost?

[Scott Hebert]

Verjigorm said:
Wuldn't holiness be taken into account by the H2 cost similar to the bonus abilities given to other magical disciplines?



That is my contention.


Illwinter's site says (in general) it is a 50% increase. Look at Pythium's Theurg however:



Actually, Illwinter's site says that it is a 50% increase for units. It does not state, one way or the other, what it is for commanders.


The Theurg costs 150gp/1rp and has magic paths of A, W, S2, H3. Ordering the paths from highest to lowest we get:
Basic Commander Price: 30gp
S2: 1st Path, level 2 = +90gp
W: 2nd Path, level 1 = +20gp
A: 3rd Path, level 1 = +10gp
-----
150gp
But wait a minute!
H3: Holy Priest = +50gp



Yes, this is perfectly accurate. The Theurg should cost, without any extra cost for being Sacred, 200g, by Illwinter's standards. Such things as this prompted my analysis. Using my methods, the Theurg comes out to about 180g (basically, his 'frame' is worth quite a bit less than 30g).


So the Arch Theurg (according to Illwinter's scheme) gets H3 for free--not including the 50% sacred cost increase.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/confused.gif




Arch Theurg, or Theurg? If you're referring to Theurg... yeah, he's HHH and Sacred for free.

[Scott Hebert]

Saber Cherry said:
Living Ermor has non-sacred priests.



Actually, Saber, it's not marked. I deliberately went in and modded BE Ermor's Thaumaturgs Holy... and it doesn't show up. I thought I had checked Upkeep changes, and saw that yes, indeed, they are Holy, but I may have mistaken that.

I do know one of two things, though:

1) Unholy priests cannot be Sacred.
2) Unholy priests may be Sacred, but it is never marked.

Can anyone think of a reason why Commanders can't be Unholy?

[Scott Hebert]

Verjigorm said:
I see... If you see where I am going with the example above, there are many instances in the game where units are given substantial cost bonuses, regardless. Most Holy units are sacred, but few take into account the cost increase for sacredness, and some do not even take into account the actual cost of Holy magic



Perfectly true. OTOH, there are commanders (like the Pan, especially in New Era) who get gimped beyond reason for no apparent reason.


--cite also the Monk, cost 30gp, H2; that is unless, the Monk's "body" as Scott mentions is worth only 10gp and then, his sacredness is still free OR included with the cost of H2.... That still leaves the conundrum of units like the Theurg.



The Monk actually has a negative 'stat cost'. By my rubric, it should cost 45g. 10g for Infantry Commander (it can build fortresses and equip things), 10g for being Stealthy, 20g for Holy-2, 10g for Leadership 25 (I think; I'm going from memory), and about -5 for stats.

The base priest, OTOH, does cost only 30g (the difference between the Priest and the Monk is Leadership 25 instead of 10, and Stealthy).

[Scott Hebert]

Well, theurgs are cheap because they can't really accomplish much without a large set of communicants backing them up. Theurgs and arch theurgs have base encumbrances that are extremely high for most spellcasters as it is assumed that you will have many communicants around.



I'm sorry, but I disagree with this and STRONGLY. Theurgs have no business being that cheap. They accomplish plenty for Pythium. They research quite decently well, especially considering they are sacred. Compare them to Mictlan, who has to pay at least 80g more for the same number of paths. The only nations where the Theurg wouldn't be a good researcher are ones that have even BETTER researchers (Man, Caelum, and GE Arco spring to mind).

They are natural communion makers. Unlike the Theurg Communicant (whose only purpose is to 'take it for the team'), the Theurgs can actually do stuff while in a Communion. I've heard people say that their Communion Slaves 'just stand around', but that has never been my experience.

Yes, they have rather high Encumbrance. However, I don't think it's because of their 'communion abilities'. I believe it's due to the fact that they wear heavy robes, which isn't modeled on armor because they didn't want it to be removable. I can point out several other nations that have high-encumbrance mages (Abysia's Anathemants come to mind) but don't have the Communion ability that Pythium does.

[Scott Hebert]

Verjigorm said:
If you take a look at the Arch Theurg, note that:
H4 = 150gp
S3 = 150gp
A2 = 60gp
W = 10gp
? = 10gp
----------
= 380gp



Well, you've undervalued the ?. Assuming a full-random pick (which I think is safe in this case), you have to calculate the cost of a 4/2/1 split, a 3/3/1 split, a 3/2/2 split, and a 3/2/1/1 split, weigh them according to the probability of attaining such a split (0.125 each for the first three, 0.625 for the last), and then add to find out how much that '?' is worth.

At a guess, probably between 25-30g.


I could have a unit with Enc 50 with paths of 3F3E3~? ( ~? = Linked full random) who would be extraordinarily useful in ritual, but almost useless in combat. How much does he cost?



Well, see, that depends on whether he's with Pythium or Pangaea. If the former, 100g. If the latter, 500g and capital-only. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[Scott Hebert]

Just as an aside on the whole 'sacred unholy' thing, I noted that Desert Tombs C'tis have them, but those are summoned, not recruited. Also, by screenshot, the Keeper of the Tombs are Holy-2 but not Sacred.

Anyway, I'm through Caelum, and here's the new 'special' values:

Fly: 20
Trample: 10
Research: 10/pt.
Sceptic: 50 (includes Stealthy(0))
Healing: 20

Again, this is in Name/Current Value/Calculated Value format.

C'tis:

Taskmaster,40,36 (does this have animal awe?)
Commander of C'tis,40,38
Lizard Lord,60,48
High Priest of C'tis,120,85
Hierodule,40,38
Sauromancer,180,219
Shaman,110,103
Lizard King,280,217
Empoisoner,110,117

Desert Tombs C'tis:

Keeper of the Tombs,110,103

Miasma C'tis:

Marshmaster,220,211.75

Arcoscephale:

Scout,20,20
Mounted Commander,60,60 (this tells me I'm on to something about the 'mounted' thing)
Hoplite Commander,40,33
Hypaspist Commander,45,35
Strategos,65,45
Priestess,110,107
Mystic,180,166.875
Astrologer,180,187

Arcoscephale, Golden Era:

Myrmidon Champion,35,34
Chariot Commander,70,76
Wind Lord,175,118
Engineer,60,65
Icarid Champion,50,51.5
Philosopher,50,52
Sceptic,50,54

Caelum:

Caelian Scout,20,47
Storm General,35,59
Seraph,100,154
High Seraph,175,303.5
Seraphine,90,108

Caelum,Return of the Raptors:

Seraph,140,154
Harab Seraph,90,100
Harab Elder,270,277

(Yes, Caelum is under-priced just about across the board.)

Working on more... don't know exactly when I'll have it all up.

[Scott Hebert]

I am finished with the national commanders. I will be posting the actual and calculated costs shortly. I am currently going back and inputting all the data into Excel, to double-check my work (I was doing it by hand before). Just a couple of comments for now.

Base Pan is (surprisingly) costed exactly right.
Centaurs are not considered 'mounted'.
My rubric pegs the cost of the Vanheim leaders.

Once I post, I would greatly appreciate people's input as to the various costs associated with the various abilities. As it is right now (in Excel), I will be able to rapidly change the values (and thus the totals), as a way of trying to fine-tune this.

Also, if any modders want to see how their commanders do under my rubric, please LMK (the raw data on the commanders would also be nice).

Finally, isn't there a mod that gives you access to every unit in the game? If there is, please LMK so that I can do the same for the independent commanders that I did for the national ones.

[Endoperez]

There is a map that gives you all units, but you wouldn't see their current gold cost from there. Edi has made excel spreadsheets that contain that information, they are on Arryn's site at http://www.dominions-2.org/

[Scott Hebert]

I used to have those. Are they accurate? (Not throwing stones... it's one thing to see the game info in front of me; it's quite another to work through a spreadsheet.)

In other news, here's the 'mass printing' of the calculated vs. 'real' costs of the national commanders (sub Oceania and Abysia, for the moment). I will edit this post with their information when I work up just a bit more sticktoitiveness. BTW, capital-only commanders gain a 10% reduction in price, after all calculations; Commander prices are rounded to the nearest multiple of 5; and it will be in the format of Commander Name,Real Cost, Calculated Cost.

Atlantis:

Atlantian Scout,20,30
Shambler Chief,50,50
Consort,80,90
Coral Queen,230,240
King of the Deep,290,290
Initiate of the Deep,60,45
Deep Seer,180,210

Pythium:

Scout,20,20
Assassin,60,60
Centurion,30,25
Emerald Lord,80,50
Serpent Lord,130,75
Theurg Communicant,50,40
Battle Deacon,90,45
Theurg Acolyte,90,65
Theurg,150,190
Arch Theurg,380,375
Hydra Tamer,55,40

Pythium - Serpent Cult:

Serpent Lord,130,85
Serpent Acolyte,80,65
Serpent Priest,190,210

Man:

Forester,25,30
Castellan,30,30
Monk,30,45
Bard,75,80
Lord Warden,130,70
Daughter of Avalon,80,105
Mother of Avalon,130,140
Crone of Avalon,230,255

Man - Last of the Tuatha:

Sidhe Champion,140,125
Sidhe Lord,280,250
Tuatha,390,385

Ulm:

Spy,30,30
Commander of Ulm,30,30
Black Lord,130,85
Master Smith,140,150
Siege Engineer,50,30
Priest,50,30
Lord Guardian,80,45

Ulm-Iron Faith:

Black Acolyte,40,30
Black Priest,140,140

Ulm-Black Forest:

Commander of Ulm,40,20
Ranger Captain,45,35
Illuminated One,80,60
Member of the Second Tier,160,145
Wolfherd,50,35
Fortuneteller,90,80

C'tis:

Taskmaster,40,35
Commander of C'tis,40,40
Lizard Lord,60,50
High Priest of C'tis,120,85
Hierodule,40,40
Sauromancer,180,220
Shaman,110,95
Lizard King,280,215
Empoisoner,110,105

C'tis - Desert Tombs:

Keeper of the Tombs,110,95
Sauromancer,180,225

C'tis - Miasma:

Marshmaster,220,210

Arcoscephale:

Mounted Commander,60,65
Hoplite Commander,40,40
Hypaspist Commander,45,40
Strategos,65,50
Priestess,110,105
Mystic,180,165
Astrologer,180,170

Arcoscephale - Golden Era

Myrmidon Champion,35,40
Chariot Commander,70,75
Wind Lord,175,95
Engineer,60,60
Icarid Champion,50,45
Philosopher,50,45
Sceptic,50,50

Caelum:

Caelian Scout,20,45
Storm General,35,60
Seraph,100,155
High Seraph,175,305
Seraphine,90,110

Caelum - Return of the Raptors:

Harab Seraph,90,100
Seraph,140,135
Harab Elder,270,250

Ermor:

Centurion,30,25
Ermorian Cultist,45,30
Thaumaturg,130,120
Grand Thaumaturg,340,315

Marignon:

Paladin,130,65
Friar,40,50
Inquisitor,110,115
High Inquisitor,210,225
Initiate,65,50
Witch Hunter,150,155
Grand Master,270,305

Marignon - Conquerors of the Sea:

Captain,75,35
Chartmaker,90,80
Royal Navigator,200,205
Missionary,60,45
Admiral,100,40

Marignon - Diabolic Faith:

Diabolist,80,65
Goetic Master,190,205

Pangaea:

Black Harpy,20,45
Centaur Commander,60,60
Minotaur Lord,60,75
Centaur Hierophant,80,100
Dryad,110,140
Pan,350,350
Pandemoniac,320,265

Pangaea - New Era:

Cataphract Commander,60,60
Minotaur Commander,60,65
Keeper of Traditions,90,90
Dryad,110,110
Pan,350,290

Pangaea - Carrion Woods:

Panic Apostate,320,290
Black Dryad,90,100

Vanheim:

Herse,30,25
Vanherse,160,160
Vanjarl,280,280
Dwarven Smith,180,190
Vanadrott,380,325

Vanheim - Mitgard:

Vanherse,160,145
Vanjarl,280,255
Galderman,160,165
Volva,120,115

Vanaheim - Helheim:

Hangadrott,400,385
Svaltalf,180,165

Jotunheim:

Chief,50,75
Jotun Scout,50,95
Jotun Herse,60,85
Jotun Jarl,130,105
Jotun Gode,200,130
Vaetti Hag,55,55
Jotun Skratti,250,245
Gygja,250,205

Jotunheim - Utgard:

Seithkona,90,70
Norna,220,190

Jotunheim - Niefelheim:

Niefel Jarl,500,360
Gygja,250,230

R'lyeh:

Traitor Prince,60,70
Illithid Lord,80,85
Star Child,85,105
Starspawn,150,190
Starspawn,280,300

Mictlan:

Tribal King,40,50
Mictlan Priest,80,70
Priest King,250,235
Rain Priest,230,200
Moon Priest,230,200
High Priest of the Sun,390,350

Tien Chi:

General,80,70
Eunuch,25,10
Imperial Consort,40,15
Ceremonial Master,50,30
Minister of Rituals,100,60
Master of the Way,100,85
Celestial Master,250,195
Prince General,150,85

Tien Chi - Spring and Autumn:

Noble,80,85
Master of the Dead,75,60
Master of the Five Elements,190,140
Celestial Master,250,235

Tien Chi - Barbarian Kings:

Khan,100,85

Machaka:

Machaka Chief,30,30
Machaka Commander,45,40
Spider Lord,100,90
Ear of the Lord,70,65
Eye of the Lord,50,60
Voice of the Lord,90,80
Witch Doctor,80,65
Sorcerer,190,170
Hunter Lord,170,90
Black Sorcerer,250,205
Sorceress,110,80
Bane Spider,150,70

A couple of things to note:

The Philosopher now has the same cost as a 1-path mage. Researches two better, but can't cast rituals/forge items/find sites.

The Witch Doctor has the same research per turn that a 1-path Holy-2 priest has. So, in exchange for not being sacred, he has two more paths to ritualize/forge/find.

Now, I will try to find space for my mod somewhere, and then link to it from here. Something that will be in my mod is to increase the Astral and Death site-searching spells to 2-path required (and reducing Death's cost to 2). I feel that it breaks an otherwise equitable relationship. Voice of Apsu will also be moved down to Conjuration-2.

Once I have the mod posted, I need people to test it. Specifically, I'm afraid that if I follow the rubric, Caelum will definitely break, and R'lyeh will have problems.

While testing this version, I will be looking at another version that has slightly different magicpath costs. This is to try to alleviate the 'cheap 1-path mage' issue, but it will break R'lyeh and Caelum even more, so more analysis will be needed.

Anyway, comments are greatly welcomed. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Saber Cherry]

Niefel Jarl is worth 500 gold =)
TC Consort for 15 gold? When I play TC I pump out consorts like crazy. They're already one of the best units in the game... IMO.
Eunuch for 10 gold? ...to good for a leader, even a terrible one. 15 or 20 gold seems like a good absolute minimum.
45 for a black harpy is too much unless you give them leadership.
30 gold for a forester? I'm not really sure if anyone uses them now...
And considering all of Man's (Avalon) mages are capitol only, increasing the price is painful.
70g Lord Wardens are pretty crazy, too... IMO.
C'tis: Even at 35 nobody will buy a taskmaster.
Bane spider at 70? ... No, I refuse to play against Machaka with that setting http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif Those are incredibly good assassins that come with 10 death gems worth of magical weaponry.
Empoisoner also shouldn't drop in price considering their potency.

Well, those are just a few preliminary thoughts. I'm think that complexifying your formula to a form like (x^2+.5xy+(a+bc)^1.5)*10+(a^1.2+f+2x)*5+15 might be necessary to get a good result, rather than using a purly additive formula like x+2y+a+5b+c+15. I can't imagine making a purely additive formula that "considered" all of Dominions' complexities.

[The_Tauren13]

Incedentally, here's a formula I made for caulculating the worth of a unit's physical stats:
HP*((6+Prot)/6)*((Mor)/10)*((1+MR)/11)*(9/(6+Enc))*((3+Str)/13)*((2+Att)/12)*((1+Def)/11)*((3+Move)/5)*((40+AP)/50)
Go ahead and tell me how useful/worthless you think it is http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

A 'normal unit' with 10 hp, 10 att, 10 def, 10 str, 10 mor, 10 mr, 10, AP, 3 enc, 2 move, and 0 prot will come out as 10 gold. Also, I weighted defense more than attack and strength, and AP the least of all... I dunno, it works ok I guess.

[Scott Hebert]

Saber Cherry said:
Niefel Jarl is worth 500 gold =)



I tend to think so, too. He weighs in at 400, then gets a 40g discount from that for being capital-only.


TC Consort for 15 gold? When I play TC I pump out consorts like crazy. They're already one of the best units in the game... IMO.



They're just spies, right? They could get another 5 or 10 points for having more Stealth than the 'average Spy', but not much more. If they're found, they're dead.


Eunuch for 10 gold? ...to good for a leader, even a terrible one. 15 or 20 gold seems like a good absolute minimum.



May I ask why? He's, well, crappy, to put it mildly. He not only can but probably WILL die to the first hit he takes from anything (including a stray arrow). There's really no way you can increase that.


45 for a black harpy is too much unless you give them leadership.



10 Leadership would be 5,for a total of 50.


30 gold for a forester? I'm not really sure if anyone uses them now...



I can see them as somewhat useful as patrollers...


And considering all of Man's (Avalon) mages are capitol only, increasing the price is painful.



Um... not really. The Daughter of Avalon is the most under-costed mage in the game. The Mother and Crone are also quite under-costed, as they stand now. Really, I'm not going to cry, at all, about Man's mage costs increasing.


70g Lord Wardens are pretty crazy, too... IMO.



Perhaps, but Man's benefitting a lot from the capital-only reduction.


C'tis: Even at 35 nobody will buy a taskmaster.



Quite possibly. THe aim is less to make everything 'more usable' than to see what they all 'should' cost.


Bane spider at 70? ... No, I refuse to play against Machaka with that setting http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif Those are incredibly good assassins that come with 10 death gems worth of magical weaponry.



Well, the Bane Spider is one of those 'niggling problems', which is how to quantify those Bane weapons.


Empoisoner also shouldn't drop in price considering their potency.



Well, if there is to be a reduction for capital-only commanders, it should be applied across the board.


Well, those are just a few preliminary thoughts. I'm think that complexifying your formula to a form like (x^2+.5xy+(a+bc)^1.5)*10+(a^1.2+f+2x)*5+15 might be necessary to get a good result, rather than using a purly additive formula like x+2y+a+5b+c+15. I can't imagine making a purely additive formula that "considered" all of Dominions' complexities.



It's quite possible that a more complex formula would give better results. As it is, though, I think the remarkable thing is not the odd 'way out there' commander so much as all of the commanders that are either spot-on or quite close to spot-on.

I am confident that, if there is a more complex formula, it is not much more complex than the (very) simple formula I am currently using.

I know others have mentioned 'prioritizing' the various stats, but then you could wrangle forever on which are more important.

I am currently considering applying a 'diminishing returns' idea on the specials... as a note, the reason Caelum and Pangaea's commanders are so expensive is the large amount of specials they have. Perhaps if there is a 'full cost/75% cost/50% cost' diminishing cost on specials, it might assuage the issue.

OTOH... there are some that have many specials (Vanheim, for instance) that come out right on... I'll have to work on it.

[Scott Hebert]

The_Tauren13 said:
Incedentally, here's a formula I made for caulculating the worth of a unit's physical stats:
HP*((6+Prot)/6)*((Mor)/10)*((1+MR)/11)*(9/(6+Enc))*((3+Str)/13)*((2+Att)/12)*((1+Def)/11)*((3+Move)/5)*((40+AP)/50)
Go ahead and tell me how useful/worthless you think it is http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif



It sucks! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif No, actually, I'll look into it and see what happens. Interesting formula. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[The_Tauren13]

Scott Hebert said:

Saber Cherry said:
Niefel Jarl is worth 500 gold =)



I tend to think so, too. He weighs in at 400, then gets a 40g discount from that for being capital-only.



I think his body is probably undercosted using an additive formula. Using my formula http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif, I bet his body alone would come out about 300.

Here's the difference:
Lets say you have a guy with 20 HP, 20 Att, 20 Def, and everything else 'average'. An additive formula would tell you hes worth 40 gold, where as a multiplicative one would say 80. I guess Im more inclined to believe the latter, but maybe someone could run some quick combat sim tests to see how many 'average' troops that guy would be worth.
Well, the real reason I went multiplicative was that for my mod I had a guy with 5 HP, 5 Str, 5 MR, etc. who came out with a negative cost... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/fear.gif

[Graeme Dice]

Scott Hebert said:
I used to have those. Are they accurate? (Not throwing stones... it's one thing to see the game info in front of me; it's quite another to work through a spreadsheet.)



I think I'll add some comments just for fun.


Deep Seer,180,210



W3S2 has no synergy, is very vulnerable to mind duel, and has no real offensive or ritual punch, so I'd never really buy these at 210.


Serpent Priest,190,210



I can't see ever spending this much on a mage that can do little besides summon vine ogres.


Daughter of Avalon,80,105
Mother of Avalon,130,140
Crone of Avalon,230,255



I don't think you've discounted them quite enough for having the extreme disadvantage of being both capital only, and being Man's only mages.


Sauromancer,180,220



Here, their lack of mobility, and general fragility, especially when coupled with the middle of the road troops of C'Tis shoulnd't be overcosted.


Sauromancer,180,225



Desert tombs already pays a hefty economic and scale hit, so the really don't need to have even fewer mages running around.


Marshmaster,220,210



They are less useful than sauromancers in general, so they really should cost less. They suffer from the same problem of all the new themes and nations in DOM2, in that the mages are all too costly for what they can actually accomplish.


High Seraph,175,305



Would anybody ever buy any high seraphs if they cost this much? You'd get far better punch out of two normal seraphs.


Grand Master,270,305



The combination of astral 2, capital only, hurts these nearly as much as it does a deep seer. They also have the added disadvantage that they will start to cast sermon of courage or banishment instead of useful spells.


Goetic Master,190,205



Diabolic faith has an even worse economic hit than Desert Tombs, which makes each mage cost relatively much more than a mage of the same gold cost for another nation. This isn't too far off from what you would expect however.


Jotun Scout,50,95
Jotun Herse,60,85
Jotun Jarl,130,105



Jotuns have the disadvantage that while their commanders are very cheap for their performance, they won't stick around on the battlefield unless you have enough normal giants with them.


Gygja,250,205



These always did seem overpriced to me.


Seithkona,90,70
Norna,220,190



I'd be wary of making one of the best sets of national mages even better.


Niefel Jarl,500,360



Aren't these considerably more dangerous than a Vanadrott?


Star Child,85,105



Assasination shouldn't really be figured into the cost of a researcher, as an assasin can never kill more than a single commander per turn, and is very rarely worth the time investment, let alone the gem investment.


Starspawn,280,300



Unlinked randoms make these only really useful as astral casters on the battlefield.


Mictlan Priest,80,70
Priest King,250,235
Rain Priest,230,200
Moon Priest,230,200
High Priest of the Sun,390,350



I pretty much expected these to be too expensive, but I'm surprised that all of the ?1H2 mages are less than 80 gold by your calculations.


Celestial Master,250,195



That's close to a usable value, but they'd probably have to cost even less to make them powerful.


I feel that it breaks an otherwise equitable relationship.



Death magic and astral magic are both important enough that no nation should be without them, so I'd be wary of making that change.

[Graeme Dice]

Scott Hebert said:
They're just spies, right? They could get another 5 or 10 points for having more Stealth than the 'average Spy', but not much more. If they're found, they're dead.



At 15 gold, I'll have 10 or more castles recruiting nothing but consorts. That way I can completely shut down an opponent's economy. With 100 consorts you could shut down something like 10 provinces a turn, and never lose more than 1 in each province.


I can see them as somewhat useful as patrollers...



You don't patrol unless you are trying to catch spies or assasin's, and then you'll use enough cheap units that the bonus on a commander doesn't matter too much.


Um... not really. The Daughter of Avalon is the most under-costed mage in the game.



Which doesn't matter much past turn 5, as you'll be recruiting nothing but Crones as soon as possible.


The Mother and Crone are also quite under-costed, as they stand now. Really, I'm not going to cry, at all, about Man's mage costs increasing.



Man is limited to a single crone per turn, which isn't nearly enough to keep up in most cases.


Perhaps, but Man's benefitting a lot from the capital-only reduction.



Man doesn't benefit from the capitol only reduction. Man is hamstrung by the capital only restriction for everything past the very earliest parts of the game.


Well, if there is to be a reduction for capital-only commanders, it should be applied across the board.



You have to price commanders based on what they can accomplish. Empoisoner's are just about the only assasins that you'll ever be able to make use of besides taking out independents early on.

[Saber Cherry]

Graeme Dice said:Empoisoners are just about the only assasins that you'll ever be able to make use of besides taking out independents early on.



Hey, my modded assassins and slayers are pretty cool http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif And I loved building slayers in the base game. Skull Talisman, Boots of the Messenger, Lifelong Protection, Copper Plate and Lucky Coin made them able to take over many remote provinces alone... and those are all low-level items.

Of course, the way I play is not necessarily an effective way to play... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[The_Tauren13]

OK, scratch that old and busted formula; that was just something basic to start off on. Here's the new hotness:
sqrt(((HP*(10.0+Prot)*Def*MR)/1000.0)*((Str*Att)/10.0))*((3.0+Move)/5.0)*((40.0+AP)/50.0)*(9.0/(6.0+Enc))*((Mor^log10(7))/7.0)

Comments:
HP, Prot, Def, MR, Str, and Att are all wieghted the same now.
The square root does not encompass Move, AP, Enc, or Mor.
log10(7) = 0.84509804001425683071221625859264 (about), meaning that about 22 Mor is worth twice as much as 10 Mor (instead of just 20 Mor being worth twice 10). I chose to use a logarithm with base 10 so that, for unit with 10 Mor, the equation (Mor^log10(7))/7 will equal 1, so a unit with 10 Mor will be 'average'.
The basic idea is: sqrt(defensiveness*offensiveness)*other. I decided upon this because in a simplistic system where the units only have 2 stats, HP and Damage, an ideal cost formula is sqrt(HP*Damage).
I counted MR as a defensive capability, but it could be brought out of the square root to be weighted more heavily.
I didn't really know what to do with Enc, so I just threw it in so that a unit with 0 Enc is worth 50% more than the same unit but with 3 ('normal') Enc, and the same unit but with 12 Enc is worth half as much.

[The_Tauren13]

I have a n00b modding question: How much is the 4th magic school worth? Ive been counting it the same as the 3rd school (10, 30, 50) so far... so that F2E2D1?1 costs 183.75.

Also, a few questions about your costs:
How much did poison resistance end up being worth? 10, same as elemental resistance? Less?
What about being an animal? I would think that does more harm than good, right?
50% increase for sacred troops, but not commanders, right?
Is the capital only reduction 10% or 20%?

One more question: What's with the 'Death Poison'? How much damage does it do?

[Scott Hebert]

Graeme Dice said:

I think I'll add some comments just for fun.



K...



Deep Seer,180,210



W3S2 has no synergy, is very vulnerable to mind duel, and has no real offensive or ritual punch, so I'd never really buy these at 210.



Very similar to most of these comments, while I do not disagree they have merit, you are also ignoring the base assumption that I made that all paths are equally valuable. I know they're not, you know they're not, but that is the assumption that Illwinter makes.

Would you perhaps give me what you think each path of magic should cost?



Serpent Priest,190,210



I can't see ever spending this much on a mage that can do little besides summon vine ogres.



I can see them doing other things (like leading your Hydras).



Daughter of Avalon,80,105
Mother of Avalon,130,140
Crone of Avalon,230,255



I don't think you've discounted them quite enough for having the extreme disadvantage of being both capital only, and being Man's only mages.



Possibly. OTOH, why is a Daughter 80g, and a Druid 140g?

Oh, and there's the Bard, but I don't think anyone counts them.



Sauromancer,180,220



Here, their lack of mobility, and general fragility, especially when coupled with the middle of the road troops of C'Tis shoulnd't be overcosted.



As opposed to their ability to spam an endless horde of Undead, and the fact that they start with Terror?



Sauromancer,180,225



Desert tombs already pays a hefty economic and scale hit, so the really don't need to have even fewer mages running around.



Well, they (and Broken Empire Ermor) are the only nations that get National Unholy Priests. Ermor's cost upkeep; C'tis's don't.



Marshmaster,220,210



They are less useful than sauromancers in general, so they really should cost less. They suffer from the same problem of all the new themes and nations in DOM2, in that the mages are all too costly for what they can actually accomplish.



I think it's more that the original nations are too good.



High Seraph,175,305



Would anybody ever buy any high seraphs if they cost this much? You'd get far better punch out of two normal seraphs.



Quite possibly. Then again, this is how much Illwinter's formula gives them.



Grand Master,270,305



The combination of astral 2, capital only, hurts these nearly as much as it does a deep seer. They also have the added disadvantage that they will start to cast sermon of courage or banishment instead of useful spells.



Perhaps. OTOH, Fire/Astral has many synergistic abilities.



Goetic Master,190,205



Diabolic faith has an even worse economic hit than Desert Tombs, which makes each mage cost relatively much more than a mage of the same gold cost for another nation. This isn't too far off from what you would expect however.



About the only thing Diabolic Faith is missing is a national Blood-3 mage (which the Master can get, I believe).



Jotun Scout,50,95
Jotun Herse,60,85
Jotun Jarl,130,105



Jotuns have the disadvantage that while their commanders are very cheap for their performance, they won't stick around on the battlefield unless you have enough normal giants with them.



Or you use nothing but Commanders. Experimenting with this approach, some increase in cost might be needed. Something I am looking into, however, is a way of working Size into the calculations... bigger troops get a reduction on certain things (HPs and Str, primarily). That would lower these costs, R'lyeh, and even Caelum.



Gygja,250,205



These always did seem overpriced to me.



Er... are you sure you want to agree with me on this? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif



Seithkona,90,70
Norna,220,190



I'd be wary of making one of the best sets of national mages even better.



I know how good these are, but if you increase the Astral/Death Searching spells to 2-path each, the Seithkona become a little less valuable.



Niefel Jarl,500,360



Aren't these considerably more dangerous than a Vanadrott?



Well, that depends. The Vanadrott is Glamored, and can throw much better spells, overall, than the Jarl. Perhaps Cherry can run them both through the simulator? Or can spells not be modeled just yet?



Star Child,85,105



Assasination shouldn't really be figured into the cost of a researcher, as an assasin can never kill more than a single commander per turn, and is very rarely worth the time investment, let alone the gem investment.



Perhaps a reduction in the cost would be in order, but not a simple ignoring of that ability. If you cut the Assassin cost in half, say, his cost goes down to 90. This would also help Man if you apply the same reasoning to the Bard.



Starspawn,280,300



Unlinked randoms make these only really useful as astral casters on the battlefield.



Or guaranteed Acashic casters. Are they total randoms or not? I seem to recall a 5S one before. The cost is for total randoms. If they aren't, the costs may change.



Mictlan Priest,80,70
Priest King,250,235
Rain Priest,230,200
Moon Priest,230,200
High Priest of the Sun,390,350



I pretty much expected these to be too expensive, but I'm surprised that all of the ?1H2 mages are less than 80 gold by your calculations.



I don't use the 'base 30g' cost. Instead, I use my own formula. However, I am thinking of raising the first path's first level cost from 30 to 50, which would add 20g to all of the 1-path mages. However, since that will cause issues with all of my magic pricing, I'm leery to try that just yet.



Celestial Master,250,195



That's close to a usable value, but they'd probably have to cost even less to make them powerful.



Is it their 1S that's a problem?



I feel that it breaks an otherwise equitable relationship.



Death magic and astral magic are both important enough that no nation should be without them, so I'd be wary of making that change.



[/quote]

Perhaps, but this almost sounds like chicken-and-egg. Perhaps they are so important because the gems needed to power their spells are so easily found (comparatively speaking).

Anyway, I will take your comments under advisement.

[Saber Cherry]

Death Poison: 35 damage IIRC. Animal is a negative feature.

As for morale value... it's sort of an s-curve with the steepest part around 9, with asymptotes at maybe 5 and 16. I can't think of an s-curve equation offhand.

At any rate, morale 14 is perhaps twice as valuable as morale 10... and above that it doesn't matter much. From my observations.

[Saber Cherry]

Scott Hebert said:

Well, that depends. The Vanadrott is Glamored, and can throw much better spells, overall, than the Jarl. Perhaps Cherry can run them both through the simulator? Or can spells not be modeled just yet?



Sorry, no... by the time I did that, I'd have pretty much written (a graphics-free version of) Dominions II.

(regarding Celestial Master)

Is it their 1S that's a problem?



The problem is that with their level-1 paths, there are virtually no useful spells they can cast.

[Scott Hebert]

Graeme Dice said:

Scott Hebert said:
They're just spies, right? They could get another 5 or 10 points for having more Stealth than the 'average Spy', but not much more. If they're found, they're dead.



At 15 gold, I'll have 10 or more castles recruiting nothing but consorts. That way I can completely shut down an opponent's economy. With 100 consorts you could shut down something like 10 provinces a turn, and never lose more than 1 in each province.



Presuming I kill any of them before I'm right on top of you. You do have a point, though. Perhaps a blanket increase in their cost is in order. (All spies.)

Would it be better if catching a stealthy unit created an Assassination-type encounter?



I can see them as somewhat useful as patrollers...



You don't patrol unless you are trying to catch spies or assasin's, and then you'll use enough cheap units that the bonus on a commander doesn't matter too much.



Well, as a note, Assassins and Spies have become cheaper, so patrolling might be useful.



Um... not really. The Daughter of Avalon is the most under-costed mage in the game.



Which doesn't matter much past turn 5, as you'll be recruiting nothing but Crones as soon as possible.



I don't necessarily agree with that, but then, I don't have your vast experience playing this game.



The Mother and Crone are also quite under-costed, as they stand now. Really, I'm not going to cry, at all, about Man's mage costs increasing.



Man is limited to a single crone per turn, which isn't nearly enough to keep up in most cases.



Perhaps. Again, you are the experienced player here.



Perhaps, but Man's benefitting a lot from the capital-only reduction.



Man doesn't benefit from the capitol only reduction. Man is hamstrung by the capital only restriction for everything past the very earliest parts of the game.



And they benefit the same amount as anyone else by the capital-only cost reduction. Now, I may revise the reduction I give so that the reduction is greater the more capital-only commanders there are. That would solve this issue (about the only one it wouldn't solve would be the Bane Spider one).



Well, if there is to be a reduction for capital-only commanders, it should be applied across the board.



You have to price commanders based on what they can accomplish. Empoisoner's are just about the only assasins that you'll ever be able to make use of besides taking out independents early on.



[/quote]

If you say so. I've seen quite a few 'assassin builds' around that are quite effective at any point.

[Scott Hebert]

Saber Cherry said:
Sorry, no... by the time I did that, I'd have pretty much written (a graphics-free version of) Dominions II.



And this is a problem? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif


(regarding Celestial Master)

Is it their 1S that's a problem?



The problem is that with their level-1 paths, there are virtually no useful spells they can cast.



[/quote]

Which is why they're so low. *sigh* It seems apparentto me that people seem to think that the under-costed mages are the 'right' ones, and everything else is horribly overcosted.

[The_Tauren13]

Saber Cherry said:
As for morale value... it's sort of an s-curve with the steepest part around 9, with asymptotes at maybe 5 and 16. I can't think of an s-curve equation offhand.

At any rate, morale 14 is perhaps twice as valuable as morale 10... and above that it doesn't matter much. From my observations.



Hmm... so perhaps I took the wrong approach.
How about: (((x/10)-1)^(1/3))+1
<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
Morale Cost
6 0.26
7 0.33
8 0.42
9 0.54
10 1.00
11 1.46
12 1.58
13 1.67
14 1.74
15 1.79
16 1.84
17 1.89
18 1.93
</pre><hr />

[Huzurdaddi]

Scott,

I think you are on the correct path with your costing. The power of Caelum and C'tis almost 100% come from their mages and this is refelect in your increase of their cost.

Your changes will clearly change the flavour of the game. Many people really like the current optimization points ( Caelum, magic dominating, etc ) but it would also be interesting to see how your mod plays out.

WRT Spies they really should cost more. A spy is worth far more than a scout.

I also think that making the cost reduction of a capital only commander a function of the number of capital only commanders a great idea. Actually it should probably be some kind of percentage formula. But I'm sure you will work it out.

[Graeme Dice]

Scott Hebert said:
Would you perhaps give me what you think each path of magic should cost?



S2 or less is worth less than most other paths. S3 or more is worth more. W is worth the least of all except if it's in combination with a path that is useful on the battlefield.



Serpent Priest,190,210



I can't see ever spending this much on a mage that can do little besides summon vine ogres.




I can see them doing other things (like leading your Hydras).



I've never seen anyone actually use hydras, so I can't comment on that.


Possibly. OTOH, why is a Daughter 80g, and a Druid 140g?



The druid is very common, the Daughter of Avalon is not.


As opposed to their ability to spam an endless horde of Undead, and the fact that they start with Terror?



They can only summon an endless horde of undead if you've also researched alteration 5 for drain life, and have also spent 10 death gems on a skull staff. Otherwise they only get to cast about 4 raise skeletons, which is not that scary of a force.


Well, they (and Broken Empire Ermor) are the only nations that get National Unholy Priests. Ermor's cost upkeep; C'tis's don't.



Unholy priests are severely overrated. By the time you've summoned enough so that they will have a noticeable effect on your battles, your opponents should be able to deal with longdead without much difficulty. The summoned unholy priests are probably better off when used as combat platforms.


I think it's more that the original nations are too good.



That's your opinion. I'd say that Caelum's mages are a good baseline for what every nation should have.


Then again, this is how much Illwinter's formula gives them.



True, but nobody would buy them at that cost.


OTOH, Fire/Astral has many synergistic abilities.



It has a single synergistic spell in astral fire, which is inferior to the soul slay that an S3F3 mage could otherwise cast.


Or you use nothing but Commanders.



That does not work at all, as a single death means that all your commanders run away.


I know how good these are, but if you increase the Astral/Death Searching spells to 2-path each, the Seithkona become a little less valuable.



I'd go the other route and decrease all site searching spells to 1 in the respective path.


The Vanadrott is Glamored, and can throw much better spells, overall, than the Jarl.



You don't use a Niefel Jarl for its spellcasting ability. You use it as a full-fledged SC. This is a role that a Vanadrott cannot match as the Van does not have sufficient hitpoints.


Perhaps a reduction in the cost would be in order, but not a simple ignoring of that ability.



Why not ignore it? Is there any way to make assasination cost effective?


Or guaranteed Acashic casters.



Acashic record costs too much to worthwhile.


Are they total randoms or not? I seem to recall a 5S one before.



If you have a 5S one, they you got very lucky, as you're much more likely to get something along the lines of S3W1B1N1, which doesn't have too much of a use.


Is it their 1S that's a problem?



That's the worst of their problems.


Perhaps they are so important because the gems needed to power their spells are so easily found (comparatively speaking).



No, they are important because astral provides luck, and magic resist in the form of the lucky pendant, lucky coin, starshine skullcap and antimagic amulet, while death magic provides wraith swords and decent summons.

[Graeme Dice]

Scott Hebert said:
If you say so. I've seen quite a few 'assassin builds' around that are quite effective at any point.



They might be able to kill any human commander they run across, but that's not going to help you very much when somebody takes the fairly simple step of recruiting scouts, 30 gold commanders, and H2 priests for your assasins to spend their turns against.

[The_Tauren13]

Or maybe dump the equation and pull something like this:
<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
Morale Cost
0 0.00
1 0.05
2 0.20
3 0.32
4 0.41
5 0.47
6 0.50
7 0.70
8 0.85
9 0.95
10 1.00
11 1.10
12 1.30
13 1.60
14 2.00
15 2.12
16 2.23
17 2.33
18 2.43
19 2.51
20 2.60
21 2.67
22 2.74
23 2.79
24 2.85
25 2.89
26 2.93
27 2.96
28 2.98
29 2.99
30 3.00
</pre><hr />



Graeme Dice said:
I'd say that Caelum's mages are a good baseline for what every nation should have.


Right. Lets make national troops more useless than they already are. And lets make most battle summons more effective than most ritual summons. What a fun game!


Graeme Dice said:

Scott Hebert said:
If you say so. I've seen quite a few 'assassin builds' around that are quite effective at any point.



They might be able to kill any human commander they run across, but that's not going to help you very much when somebody takes the fairly simple step of recruiting scouts, 30 gold commanders, and H2 priests for your assasins to spend their turns against.


If I can spend 50 Gold and a few gems to make my opponent lose 30-50 gold per turn, I'll be happy.

[Saber Cherry]

The_Tauren13 said:
Or maybe dump the equation and pull something like this:
<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
Morale Cost
0 0.00
1 0.05
2 0.20
3 0.32
4 0.41
5 0.47
6 0.50
7 0.70
8 0.85
9 0.95
10 1.00
11 1.10
12 1.30
13 1.60
14 2.00
15 2.12
16 2.23
17 2.33
18 2.43
19 2.51
20 2.60
21 2.67
22 2.74
23 2.79
24 2.85
25 2.89
26 2.93
27 2.96
28 2.98
29 2.99
30 3.00
</pre><hr />




That looks really good! My suggestions:

Cap minimum at .5, and cap maximum at 2.5. Morale 20 is NOT worth any more than morale 19. Not even .1%, and certainly not the 4% or so that your chart lists... since above 16 or so, units will almost never fail morale saves or repel rolls. I've never seen units with 18 morale retreat (when in their own squad).

Morale below 5 (from what I understand of the morale formulas) no longer has any real effect. Units with 5 morale will virtually always fail morale saves and repel rolls (that hit), so a morale 1 units is as useful as a morale 5 unit.

Thanks for generating the chart!

[Endoperez]

And that loss would be far more than 30-50 gp, as he would never know just where that assasin was going to be the next turn... Especially if he has flying boots. One would need to have 5+ scouts with any army that moves near enemy area, and either lots of scouts or lots of patrollers (or pd) in research provinces.

[Graeme Dice]

The_Tauren13 said:
Right. Lets make national troops more useless than they already are. And lets make most battle summons more effective than most ritual summons.



Are you still hung up on false horrors? They are decent, but it's not like there's no easy ways to get around them.

[Evil Dave]

Saber Cherry said:
As for morale value... it's sort of an s-curve with the steepest part around 9, with asymptotes at maybe 5 and 16. I can't think of an s-curve equation offhand.



You can generate s-curves (gamma curves) by integrating normal or polynomial distributions. In this case, integrating the distribution of 5 three-sided dice will get you almost the distribution you want: range of 5-15, with the steepest slope at 10.

[Saber Cherry]

Evil Dave said:

Saber Cherry said:
As for morale value... it's sort of an s-curve with the steepest part around 9, with asymptotes at maybe 5 and 16. I can't think of an s-curve equation offhand.



You can generate s-curves (gamma curves) by integrating normal or polynomial distributions. In this case, integrating the distribution of 5 three-sided dice will get you almost the distribution you want: range of 5-15, with the steepest slope at 10.



Thanks http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif Actually, I play Dominions to get away from math (especially calculus) but for some reason it keeps popping up... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/confused.gif

[Evil Dave]

Saber Cherry said:
Actually, I play Dominions to get away from math (especially calculus) but for some reason it keeps popping up... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/confused.gif



Really? Wow. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif From reading this thread and the others on modding and balance, I'd concluded:

1) You and the other good/knowledgable players really liked math.

2) The reason I'm not very good at Dom2 is that I wasn't using enuf math, and was worrying too much about silly notions like reducing the other side's ability to fight. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Saber Cherry]

Evil Dave said:
Really? Wow. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif From reading this thread and the others on modding and balance, I'd concluded:

1) You and the other good/knowledgable players really liked math.

2) The reason I'm not very good at Dom2 is that I wasn't using enuf math, and was worrying too much about silly notions like reducing the other side's ability to fight. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif




Hmm... maybe I was kidding a little. I actually like math, until people start talking about eigenvalues and integrating high-degree trig functions http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[Scott Hebert]

Graeme Dice said:

Scott Hebert said:
Would you perhaps give me what you think each path of magic should cost?



S2 or less is worth less than most other paths. S3 or more is worth more. W is worth the least of all except if it's in combination with a path that is useful on the battlefield.



I would prefer, actually, if you could rate each path separately, and then give a bonus/penalty on what paths it 'shows up with'. If you could do that, I could recalculate the costs of the mages.


I've never seen anyone actually use hydras, so I can't comment on that.



Well, I like to use them, at least. I think that in MP they would be less viable, as apparently MR is about the only stat that is of any use.



Possibly. OTOH, why is a Daughter 80g, and a Druid 140g?



The druid is very common, the Daughter of Avalon is not.



The Druid also has an opportunity cost of 400g for the Temple and Laboratory to make him. The Daughter does not. Shouldn't that factor into the costs as well?



As opposed to their ability to spam an endless horde of Undead, and the fact that they start with Terror?



They can only summon an endless horde of undead if you've also researched alteration 5 for drain life, and have also spent 10 death gems on a skull staff. Otherwise they only get to cast about 4 raise skeletons, which is not that scary of a force.



Hrm. I seem to do well enough with Enchantment-3 and the Raise spells (they can throw about 5 or so each before falling over). Then again, I never get to play against the cutthroat MP people.



Well, they (and Broken Empire Ermor) are the only nations that get National Unholy Priests. Ermor's cost upkeep; C'tis's don't.



Unholy priests are severely overrated. By the time you've summoned enough so that they will have a noticeable effect on your battles, your opponents should be able to deal with longdead without much difficulty. The summoned unholy priests are probably better off when used as combat platforms.



Mm. I have a question, Graeme. This is meant seriously, not sarcastically. Do you use non-summoned troops at all in your games?



I think it's more that the original nations are too good.



That's your opinion. I'd say that Caelum's mages are a good baseline for what every nation should have.



That would require an entire re-write of Illwinter's magic cost formula to compensate. Would you like me to do that, and then report on what everyone's mages should cost?



Then again, this is how much Illwinter's formula gives them.



True, but nobody would buy them at that cost.



At this point, I think you should talk to Illwinter about their costing formulas, then.



Or you use nothing but Commanders.



That does not work at all, as a single death means that all your commanders run away.



Barring other factors (like someone spamming troops), yes. Again, there is always a way to handle that issue.



I know how good these are, but if you increase the Astral/Death Searching spells to 2-path each, the Seithkona become a little less valuable.



I'd go the other route and decrease all site searching spells to 1 in the respective path.



Mm. Wouldn't that make Sages even better than they are currently?



The Vanadrott is Glamored, and can throw much better spells, overall, than the Jarl.



You don't use a Niefel Jarl for its spellcasting ability. You use it as a full-fledged SC. This is a role that a Vanadrott cannot match as the Van does not have sufficient hitpoints.



I would think that with the spells a Vanadrott can cast, the HPs would not be as great of an issue. I would agree that the Hangadrott is a better example than the Vanadrott, but that would require me playing with a Death scale.



Perhaps a reduction in the cost would be in order, but not a simple ignoring of that ability.



Why not ignore it? Is there any way to make assasination cost effective?



Apparently, you don't think so. However, if I removed the cost for being an assassin, you'd have a flood of them. Now, working on the 'diminishing returns' system, a mage-assassin wouldn't 'spend' as much for his assassination capability as the 'straight' assassin (to the point of 0, perhaps).

Personally, I don't use Assassins for the same reasons I am 'troop-based'. I hate having too many commanders to tell what to do (it makes the turns take too long, for me).



Or guaranteed Acashic casters.



Acashic record costs too much to worthwhile.



Again, that is your opinion. If I have casters who can cast Acashic Record, I generally prefer to use that than the other site-searching spells.



Are they total randoms or not? I seem to recall a 5S one before.



If you have a 5S one, they you got very lucky, as you're much more likely to get something along the lines of S3W1B1N1, which doesn't have too much of a use.



Oh, it's very rare, I'll grant you. I wanted to know more from a 'did I use the correct formula to cost them' standpoint than anything else.



Is it their 1S that's a problem?



That's the worst of their problems.



Mm. Well, 'spread-out' mages cost less.



Perhaps they are so important because the gems needed to power their spells are so easily found (comparatively speaking).



No, they are important because astral provides luck, and magic resist in the form of the lucky pendant, lucky coin, starshine skullcap and antimagic amulet, while death magic provides wraith swords and decent summons.



[/quote]

And if they didn't? And what you term 'decent' I term 'overpowered', by and large.

However, I am not trying to 'mod' the game to what I think is fair or balanced. I am trying to see if I can come up with a rubric that calculates the gold cost of a commander accurately.

To that end, I am going to raise the 'first path, first level' cost from 30 to 50, and recalculate the mages. I will probably also have to make Holy magic the same as the first path magic (50,90,150), and it will again come closer to current costs.

[Scott Hebert]

Huzurdaddi said:
Scott,

I think you are on the correct path with your costing. The power of Caelum and C'tis almost 100% come from their mages and this is refelect in your increase of their cost.



As I said to Graeme, my intent is not to change the balance point of the game, but to find a point where everything comes out to the cost that is listed for them in the games.


Your changes will clearly change the flavour of the game. Many people really like the current optimization points ( Caelum, magic dominating, etc ) but it would also be interesting to see how your mod plays out.



I'd hope that I wouldn't change the flavor of the game that much.


WRT Spies they really should cost more. A spy is worth far more than a scout.



Yes, but right now it's worth 10 more. Much more than that, and... well, I don't know. How much do you think an Assassin is worth? Do you think a Spy is worth more?


I also think that making the cost reduction of a capital only commander a function of the number of capital only commanders a great idea. Actually it should probably be some kind of percentage formula. But I'm sure you will work it out.



A percentage formula could end up with expensive mages (like the Crone) ending up nearly the same as less expensive mages, which would obviate the cheap mages.

Quite possibly, -10g,-5g for each commander after the first, would work. It sort of feels weird for me to have one percentage-based calculation, and no others.

[Scott Hebert]

Evil Dave said:
Really? Wow. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif From reading this thread and the others on modding and balance, I'd concluded:

1) You and the other good/knowledgable players really liked math.



I love math, and I love to generate statistics. However, I am neither very good or very knowledgeable about this game.


2) The reason I'm not very good at Dom2 is that I wasn't using enuf math, and was worrying too much about silly notions like reducing the other side's ability to fight. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif



*chuckles* Nah. I'm just trying to find something to occupy my mind, and I came up with this.

[Huzurdaddi]

Scott Hebert said:
As I said to Graeme, my intent is not to change the balance point of the game, but to find a point where everything comes out to the cost that is listed for them in the games.




I understand but it will clearly change the balance of the game. Right it it looks like a lot of the powerful nations take it on the chin and I'm all for that. I look forward to a game with these new costs!

A game with these costs ( although the Nifel Jarl has to be worth more ) Sable Cherry's troop costs, Zen's spell mod, a crushing of battlefield spells ( a-la the mods Soapy has been running ), the change of all 0 enc to 1 enc, and the removal of life drain would be just swell for me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif


Scott Hebert said:
Yes, but right now it's worth 10 more. Much more than that, and... well, I don't know. How much do you think an Assassin is worth? Do you think a Spy is worth more?




I always found them undercosted. If your nation can make spies that is a real plus which indicates in my mind that the ability is undercosted.

[Graeme Dice]

Scott Hebert said:
Well, I like to use them, at least. I think that in MP they would be less viable, as apparently MR is about the only stat that is of any use.



Hydras lose because they don't have a protection score that allows them to stand up to more than about 5 militia without a serious expenditure on bless effects. Then, MR matters on those expensive units because they are a large investment, and the easiest way to defeat single large creatures is with stuff like soul slay.


The Druid also has an opportunity cost of 400g for the Temple and Laboratory to make him. The Daughter does not. Shouldn't that factor into the costs as well?



The temple is useful by itself, and having a second laboratory to spread out your researchers is also a pretty good idea.


Hrm. I seem to do well enough with Enchantment-3 and the Raise spells (they can throw about 5 or so each before falling over).



5 raise skeletons is only 25 longdead. 25 longdead, while being fairly significant as a delaying tactic, don'tnlast very long if you've planned to face undead.


Do you use non-summoned troops at all in your games?



Sure. I use more national troops that I really should in most cases, because I try to take my first province at turn two, and move up to two per turn by turn 4-5 at the latest. I don't, however, use very many con-commander summoned troops.Devils, fiends, lamia's and a couple of others are worthwhile. I find that in most other cases I'd be better off spending the gemson equipment.


That would require an entire re-write of Illwinter's magic cost formula to compensate. Would you like me to do that, and then report on what everyone's mages should cost?



Well, maybe not to the extreme that is Caelum, but C'Tis is probably a good baseline.


At this point, I think you should talk to Illwinter about their costing formulas, then.



Well, that's the reason that few people play Broken Empire Ermor as well. The Grand Thaumaturgs cost twice what a Sauromancer costs, but are also capital only and limited to D2S2?1. Even bumping them up to D3S2?1 makes them a significant threat.


Again, there is always a way to handle that issue.



Commanders without backup troops get overrun too easily by lifeless battle summons.


Mm. Wouldn't that make Sages even better than they are currently?



Probably. I'd also get rid of the research bonus on sages in that case.


I would think that with the spells a Vanadrott can cast, the HPs would not be as great of an issue.



It would have to have fire and cold immunity, which pretty much needs miscellaneous equipment slots. This would leave its MR lacking, or leave it without sufficient prot to survive being swarmed.


Again, that is your opinion. If I have casters who can cast Acashic Record, I generally prefer to use that than the other site-searching spells.



Unless you haven't searched the province at all, that's costing you more in gems than using the individual spells.


Oh, it's very rare, I'll grant you. I wanted to know more from a 'did I use the correct formula to cost them' standpoint than anything else.



Yes, you did.


And if they didn't? And what you term 'decent' I term 'overpowered', by and large.



If astral and death magic didn't provide those things, then they wouldn't be nearly as useful at low levels. This would further marginalize most of the nations and pretenders by reducing the number of viable strategies.

[Scott Hebert]

Graeme Dice said:

Scott Hebert said:
Well, I like to use them, at least. I think that in MP they would be less viable, as apparently MR is about the only stat that is of any use.



Hydras lose because they don't have a protection score that allows them to stand up to more than about 5 militia without a serious expenditure on bless effects. Then, MR matters on those expensive units because they are a large investment, and the easiest way to defeat single large creatures is with stuff like soul slay.



Oh, yes, I agree there. Regarding Hydras, though, a Nature-4 blessing is normal for me (and also puts you in good stead to get Gift of Health).



The Druid also has an opportunity cost of 400g for the Temple and Laboratory to make him. The Daughter does not. Shouldn't that factor into the costs as well?



The temple is useful by itself, and having a second laboratory to spread out your researchers is also a pretty good idea.



Agreed, but if I had a choice, I'd rather put the Laboratory in a Sage province rather than a Druid province. (BTW, the Druid is overcosted, but the concept is the same.)



Hrm. I seem to do well enough with Enchantment-3 and the Raise spells (they can throw about 5 or so each before falling over).



5 raise skeletons is only 25 longdead. 25 longdead, while being fairly significant as a delaying tactic, don'tnlast very long if you've planned to face undead.



25 Longdead, per Sauromancer. Spending money on Sauromancers instead of troops, and 'rushing' to Enchantment-3, seems a not too entirely bad early strategy with C'tis.



Do you use non-summoned troops at all in your games?



Sure. I use more national troops that I really should in most cases, because I try to take my first province at turn two, and move up to two per turn by turn 4-5 at the latest.



I'm just wondering where you get all the money to do everything you seem to think is able to do. I mean, I play with good Scales and such, but I never seem to have enough money to do anything.

Then again, I do play on small maps normally, so the games don't last that long.


I don't, however, use very many con-commander summoned troops.Devils, fiends, lamia's and a couple of others are worthwhile. I find that in most other cases I'd be better off spending the gemson equipment.



To outfit SCs?



That would require an entire re-write of Illwinter's magic cost formula to compensate. Would you like me to do that, and then report on what everyone's mages should cost?



Well, maybe not to the extreme that is Caelum, but C'Tis is probably a good baseline.



C'tis isn't that much out of whack, actually.



At this point, I think you should talk to Illwinter about their costing formulas, then.



Well, that's the reason that few people play Broken Empire Ermor as well. The Grand Thaumaturgs cost twice what a Sauromancer costs, but are also capital only and limited to D2S2?1. Even bumping them up to D3S2?1 makes them a significant threat.



I love Broken Empire Ermor. Pythium's troops with Undead armies?

Score.



Again, there is always a way to handle that issue.



Commanders without backup troops get overrun too easily by lifeless battle summons.



That's why you have a couple of commanders spamming your own lifeless battle summons, right?



Mm. Wouldn't that make Sages even better than they are currently?



Probably. I'd also get rid of the research bonus on sages in that case.



That would certainly be interesting. You'd have to change some of the other mages as well, and you'd also increase the cost of random picks in general with that.



I would think that with the spells a Vanadrott can cast, the HPs would not be as great of an issue.



It would have to have fire and cold immunity, which pretty much needs miscellaneous equipment slots. This would leave its MR lacking, or leave it without sufficient prot to survive being swarmed.



Mm. Everything is focussed around making unkillable SCs, isn't it? I wonder if anyone could destroy that capability in the game...



Again, that is your opinion. If I have casters who can cast Acashic Record, I generally prefer to use that than the other site-searching spells.



Unless you haven't searched the province at all, that's costing you more in gems than using the individual spells.



Assuming I have access to all of the individual spells, yes. A lot of the time, I don't.


And if they didn't? And what you term 'decent' I term 'overpowered', by and large.




If astral and death magic didn't provide those things, then they wouldn't be nearly as useful at low levels. This would further marginalize most of the nations and pretenders by reducing the number of viable strategies.



What, in your opinion, WOULD increase the number of options while also decreasing reliance on SCs?

[Graeme Dice]

Scott Hebert said:
Agreed, but if I had a choice, I'd rather put the Laboratory in a Sage province rather than a Druid province. (BTW, the Druid is overcosted, but the concept is the same.)



I think it's because nature 2 is very useful in general to a nation without nature mages, but not that useful to a nation with N3A2?1 mages.


25 Longdead, per Sauromancer. Spending money on Sauromancers instead of troops, and 'rushing' to Enchantment-3, seems a not too entirely bad early strategy with C'tis.



It's a very good strategy. You do need a screen of living troops to prevent being arrowed, and to prevent cavalry charges.


I'm just wondering where you get all the money to do everything you seem to think is able to do.



You don't do everything, you basically pick and choose which things you're going to concentrate on, and hope that your allies can help to cover the holes.


To outfit SCs?



I'd classify them as thugs.


I love Broken Empire Ermor. Pythium's troops with Undead armies?



I like them too, it's just that they are missing something to give them punch.


That's why you have a couple of commanders spamming your own lifeless battle summons, right?



You can do that, but you'll also need to bring a storm along to keep those commanders safe.


Everything is focussed around making unkillable SCs, isn't it?



Not everything, Vanadrott's are unparalled as a raiding force, and if you could make them fly would be nearly unstoppable.


Assuming I have access to all of the individual spells, yes. A lot of the time, I don't.



I always make it a priority to find and/or develop mages that are capable of casting those spells.


What, in your opinion, WOULD increase the number of options while also decreasing reliance on SCs?



Change the routing behaviour to allow one to force commanders to remain on the battlefield unless the commander fails a morale check. This would allow a nation like Ulm to take down many SCs using black lords with cheaply forged equipment. You could also use commanders like Firbolgs in large quantities without worrying about whether one of them will be killed and flee the battlefield.

Spells that can significantly improve the abilities of normal troops at easier to reach research points than alteration 9.

More games should be played on the rich setting as well, as it places the magic/might balance point at a considerably different location. Or just mod the game so that every province produces twice as much gold.

Change encumbrance and fatigue so that they are less granular, and so that stronger and larger creatures aren't as fatigued by their armour.

[Endoperez]

In Master of Magic the problem was solved by combination of unit buffs and more powerful experience levels which only affects nationl units.
One thing I think would like is that summonables with 14+ stats would start with few experience stars and get their stats lowered so that it amounts the same thing. Then elite and experienced nationals would have some change of killing Devils etc, as they wouldn't have gotten the same bonuses as fast.

[Huzurdaddi]

Graeme Dice said:
Spells that can significantly improve the abilities of normal troops at easier to reach research points than alteration 9.




Zen has done this in his mod and it is getting a serious workout in the Faerun game.

If you are in the camp who thinks SC's are too powerful then simply changing all units to have at least 1 base encumberance and removing lifedrain weapons works swell.

[Graeme Dice]

Huzurdaddi said:
Zen has done this in his mod and it is getting a serious workout in the Faerun game.



I didn't last long enough in that game to see how those changes worked, so what kind of effects are army of gold and lead having?

[Scott Hebert]

Graeme Dice said:

Scott Hebert said:
Agreed, but if I had a choice, I'd rather put the Laboratory in a Sage province rather than a Druid province. (BTW, the Druid is overcosted, but the concept is the same.)



I think it's because nature 2 is very useful in general to a nation without nature mages, but not that useful to a nation with N3A2?1 mages.



I do, too, normally. That's why I like Nature Pretenders so much. In fact, I think that the Lady of Fortune is my all-time favorite.

BTW, I'm experimenting with Last of the Tuatha Sidhe Champion rush, and it's looking good so far. While not the fastest thing in the world, it's certainly rather solid, and doesn't suffer from the 'screening' problems you mention below.



25 Longdead, per Sauromancer. Spending money on Sauromancers instead of troops, and 'rushing' to Enchantment-3, seems a not too entirely bad early strategy with C'tis.



It's a very good strategy. You do need a screen of living troops to prevent being arrowed, and to prevent cavalry charges.



*nods*



I'm just wondering where you get all the money to do everything you seem to think is able to do.



You don't do everything, you basically pick and choose which things you're going to concentrate on, and hope that your allies can help to cover the holes.



What means this 'allies'? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[Scott Hebert]

Pursuant to the conversation Graeme and I had in this thread, here's a list of mage costs using a slightly different formula. It uses the Caelian Seraph and the 'low end' mages (Seithkona, etc.) as a balance point.

Warning: This is rather radical, and uses a cost reduction gradient for capital-only commanders.

King of the Deep - 180
Initiate of the Deep - 50
Deep Seer - 155

Theurg Acolyte - 80
Theurg - 140
Arch Theurg - 310

Serpent Acolyte - 80
Serpent Priest - 165

Daughter of Avalon - 65
Mother of Avalon - 80
Crone of Avalon - 155

Sidhe Champion - 95
Sidhe Lord - 135
Tuatha - 205

Master Smith - 100

Black Priest - 130

Illuminated One - 60
Second Tier - 100
Fortuneteller - 80

Sauromancer - 160
Shaman - 80
Empoisoner - 75

Keeper of the Tombs - 100
Marshmaster - 145

Priestess - 110
Mystic - 135
Astrologer - 140

Seraph - 100
High Seraph - 190

Harab Seraph - 90
Seraph - 90
Harab Elder - 180

Thaumaturg - 130
Grand Thaumaturg - 285

Inquisitor - 110
High Inquisitor - 210
Initiate - 60
Witch Hunter - 120
Grand Master - 245

Diabolist - 80
Goetic Master - 150

Chartmaker - 80
Royal Navigator - 150

Dryad - 110
Pan - 195
Pandemoniac - 160

Dryad - 80
Pan - 170

Panic Apostate - 170
Black Dryad - 80

Vanherse - 100
Vanjarl - 150
Vanadrott - 205
Dwarven Smith - 130

Galderman - 120
Volva - 80

Hangadrott - 235
Svartalf - 115

Vaetti Hag - 60
Jotun Skratti - 150
Gygja - 135

Seithkona - 90
Norna - 135

Niefel Jarl - 500 (since everyone agrees he's worth that much)

Starchild - 60
Starspawn - 130
Starspawn - 180

Mictlan Priest - 80
Priest King - 140
Rain Priest - 140
Moon Priest - 140
High Priest of the Sun - 240

Master of the Way - 100
Celestial Master - 160

Master of the Dead - 80
Master of the Five Elements - 130
Celestial Master - 190

Witch Doctor - 80
Sorcerer - 130
Sorceress - 85
Black Sorcerer - 140

Anathemant Salamander - 130
Anathemant Dragon - 270
Warlock Apprentice - 90
Warlock - 175
Demonbred - 160

Newt - 80
Sanguine Acolyte - 80
Sanguine Anathemant - 130

[Oversway]

Lots of cheap mages!

Do you have what the Niefel Jarl would have been with your formula?

[Scott Hebert]

No, but I'd guess around 200g.

After all, this assumes the base 30g commander. And considering the Seraph's 'plusses', I can't see many commanders having more than that.

[Graeme Dice]

Scott Hebert said:
King of the Deep - 180




Ack, now you've gone the other way. W3 is actually useful on these guys, as they can get W5 without path boosters, leading to three water spells that are actually very useful. The water queens, murdering winter, and niefel flames. These guys are also almost buff enough to use as mini-combatants.


Arch Theurg - 310



These guys are so fragile, and you still have to decide between building another castle for more communicants, or these, so this might be okay.


Serpent Priest - 165



This seems like a decent price for the general lack of power they have.


Crone of Avalon - 155



I'd stick with no less than 180 gold myself, as that's about the break point for gold leftover after buying high-resource troops with order 3.


Tuatha - 205



What kind of cost reduction did you have to apply to get this. I assume it has to do with how many mages of the total are capital only?


Marshmaster - 145



Interesting that this guy is so low.

As for the rest, I can definetly see that there will be more mages around. Looking at the actual costs in this case, I'd say that some of them are probably too cheap. It would make an interesting game, but not one that everyone would want to play. Did you not count physical stats that much in this case?

[Scott Hebert]

Graeme Dice said:

Scott Hebert said:
King of the Deep - 180




Ack, now you've gone the other way. W3 is actually useful on these guys, as they can get W5 without path boosters, leading to three water spells that are actually very useful. The water queens, murdering winter, and niefel flames. These guys are also almost buff enough to use as mini-combatants.



*shrug* You can't have it both ways. Either you balance to the good, the bad, the middle, or some standard we don't as yet know. Before, you told me I was balancing towards the bad end. Now, you're telling me I'm balancing towards the good end. What, in your opinion, would be a better balance point?



Tuatha - 205



What kind of cost reduction did you have to apply to get this. I assume it has to do with how many mages of the total are capital only?



5%, plus 5% for each other capital-only commander.


As for the rest, I can definetly see that there will be more mages around. Looking at the actual costs in this case, I'd say that some of them are probably too cheap. It would make an interesting game, but not one that everyone would want to play. Did you not count physical stats that much in this case?



Well, people complained that I cared about physical stats when no one seems to care about physical stats on mages. Therefore, I used the 30g base for a commander that IW states, and then applied a new spell path cost based on making a Seraph 100g, with proper extrapolation.

I figured that if the Seraph's base body was only 30g, not many others could have a cost above 30g (what with their innate flying and cold immunity).

Vanheim and Tuatha mage-commanders had a base cost of 50.

[Huzurdaddi]

Graeme Dice said:

Huzurdaddi said:
Zen has done this in his mod and it is getting a serious workout in the Faerun game.



I didn't last long enough in that game to see how those changes worked, so what kind of effects are army of gold and lead having?



Well I left the game about 25 turns ago since it was consuming literally 2 hours every night but soapyfrog kindly took over for me.

I had setup a huge blood hunting empire and tartarians factory. The combination is making for very large armies of fiends ( since contracts are cost inefficient on this map ) supported by army of gold/lead and weapons of sharpness. The combination is very effective. However the armies soapy is making ( I was planning on making them 50 fiends strong ) are much larger than I was planning ( he is going for 150-250 strong armies ) and so the weapons of sharpness is not covering all of the fiends. So SC's are able to living sometimes.

However sopay's huge armies are far more intimidating and they break down walls of any fort in 1 turn so it's a trade off ( he also does not have enough tartarians with 5E to make 50 fiend armies ).