Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

Mardagg, your point will be much stronger if you are succesfull with the "E9N4 bless on hunters" -strategy when 'everybody' knows you'll be using it. If it would be succesfull one time when nobody expects it, it would be just put down as a fluke ("yeah, it was succesfull in that one game, but that proves nothing" -style) :)

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

In the past few days i´ve been looking at the discussion in this thread and tried playing Machaka with both schemes (bless strategy/riderless spiders strategy) to see what my mileage gets...

After some SP playing i find that the riderless spider strategy is unbeatable in the early game, and gets much more bang for the buck than the big blessed spiders strategy...

The big blessed spiders, at least in SP, is however more powerfull after you expanded a little and is able to max produce the sacred spiders from the capital and is more effective if you are able to produce 10+ sacred spiders a turn (either via initial dominion of by building temples to increase production). About the bless i found that an E bless does little to the sacred spiders, while even a small N bless does improve a lot the sacred spiders survivability (specially their riders). A good W bless do help a lot too.


I found both fun and strategycally sound, at least in SP, to create a F2W4S4N4 great sage pretender and produce only brown spiders for the first year and a half, then, after i expanded my nation and have at least a second castle, start producing sacred spiders in the capital and brown spiders elsewhere...

On the mage front, i always produce the Sorceress and forget about the witch doctors... some Black sorcerers for their paths but research wise i leave everything in the hands of the sorceress and they are very interesting as combat commanders because of their spider forms....

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

good point Jarkko:)

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

Interesting. I find the Sorceresses weak. Not bad for research and neat for the spider form, but at 1F1E1D they're not what I want to be using my one capital commander slot for. I'd buy tons of them if they were recruitable everywhere. As it is, they get bought when I can't afford the real prize.
Like most top end capital only mages, I can't get enough Black Sorcerers. They're your high end mages in most paths, your best battle mages, etc.
Since they have the Spider form, they even make decent thugs. And you'll want a lot to get the random combinations.
Since Witch Doctors have lousy research, I'll buy a couple for specific duties, but I don't want a bunch of them sitting around.

On the uberbless vs minor bless vs no bless controversy, the big spiders seem pretty effective at expansion even without a bless. You'll lose a few more, but I'm not sure you lose enough to actually slow the expansion pace. And if you're not relying on a bless, you can build researchers instead of priests in the early turns.

I haven't played with the little spiders enough to say how effective they are for expansion.

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

riderless spiders are the way to go. 0 upkeep for great expansion parties and tough armies (when backed by mages).

The problem is, it's not enough. Machaka needs a modest boost to become good instead of Meh. Perhaps some spider like summons from the jungles and caves of Machaka's native turf. I don't know, something, anything to make this interesting nation actually competitive.

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

wraithlord's idea of the extra randoms is probably the best call. A simple change, but greatly increases the nation's effectiveness.

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

Its just too early to call for another boost.
After all,they just received the -33% cost reduction on the top tier unit.QM stated some pages ago,that he doesnt think Machaka needs more boost besides the PD.
Better to speak again in six months on that topic.

MA Ulm is much more important,i support Quitti there.
I just fired up a game with them and I must say they are the only nation i would refuse to play in the whole dominion world.
There are some people here arguing LA Ulm is weak...well,if i compare LA with MA,its getting ridicilous.
There is practically not a single area in which LA isnt better than MA.
The mages lack N,D,S,B(A,W).
The enc is way too high on all troops and essentially taking the guardian out of the game,which is needed to counter rushes.
Iron Angel is very difficult to cast with that requirements.
No endgame,tough early game,and nothing special midgame wise.
just plain bad.
Making the iron angel more easy to cast isnt enough here imo.
Am i missing something?

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

qm isn't going to go adding paths to mages anyway. He's said that many times.

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

I got some ideas for MA Ulm.
MA Ulm wants to win per force and not per magic.

1.
Make the guardian non-cap only.
Alternatively make him slightly better and add a new unit,something like "Black Guards",which is a non-cap only weaker version of the guardian(important here: also no shield!).

2.
Give MA Ulm a Relief type battlefield wide spell that costs E gems.

3.
Make the Iron Angel E3 or E4.

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

...

Make their heavy armor actually beneficial by reducing its encumbrance by 2 points? Surely the most skilled smiths in all dominions history can make armor which fits well and is lighter than its strength implies.