>While we are at this, I will add that I disagree with Alex' list of whammies. While all those are certainly strong tactics, most of them are countereable &, although powerful in the right setting, you can both win without most of them & you can fight them.
I (nor anyone else, AFAIK) ever said that they were uncounterable. You are reading more into what was said than was there.
>1.- Diplomacy
I wouldn't disagree that diplomacy is incredibly potent.
>I cringe when I see demands of an increase of this in MP games with stuff like 'right of passage', the Last thing we need is to make these gangfest easier. No problem with an increase of diplomacy options regarding the AI in SP, but diplomacy is strong enough as it is in MP.
This I disagree with this strongly.
In any conflict involving multiple nations, diplomacy is critical to success. It's an essential facet of strategy and has every reason to be modeled into a wargame. Particularly one as complex as Dominions.
I understand that some players like the idea of anomymous power-gaming where there is limited interaction. I have no issue with that. Such players would always have the option of turning dippy off or playing in a low interaction game. Just because some players like this however, is no reason to spite those that do like dippy.
I submit that the best path is to give the players as many options as possible, and let them pick and choose what type of game they wish to participate in.
>2.- The full economy+combat pretender with no magic+full taxing/patrolling triada:
>Hopefully this is going to change in Dom II, and we will see funnier designs with more magic & less economy.
While I'd like to see some changes to this as well, I have concerns that the current system (Dom II) that limits the "money" scales will have the opposite effect, making gold more scarce will limit mages and might inspire much more military and early game super combatants. I dearly hope I'm wrong.
>3.- Supercombatants: Wyrms & Nataraja types early on, IDs, Pazuzus, FIs and other breeds later on. This is the way to go for victories with no cost, they are an all or nothing bet, but when they win they win big.
>This is also being tonned down a bit for Dom II, which is good. I like playing with these guys, it's funny to equip them & tailor them to the opposition, but they are too strong as the game stands.
Again, less money and more magic scale will inspire more super pretenders. Lessening the effect of the shields is only a small check on their potency.
I'll be better able to comment once I see the new game.
>4.- The army of summoners backed up with relief. I am surprised this doesn't get complained about more...field 20 mages, have them cast spells as if they were 60 instead, what's balanced about this?
The reason this isn't a huge issue is that by the time you have giant armies of mages and all the research for such combo's, we are also entering the "army bLasting" phase of the game. The army bLasters rip up stacks of mages.
Furthermore, super combatants were always much more in evidence than mage stacks. The mage stacks were one of the few ways to counter super combatants. Hence the lack of complaints.
Indeed, if Dom II has restrictions on conjuration (seems that way), then we will just see a movement towards evocation/relief instead.
This said, much of this is conjecture since I haven't seen the new system in action. I think once we all get the new game and spend some time with it, we will all be better qualified to judge the new balance.
Re: Dom I Strategies which WON\'T work in Dom II
Hybrid Mode
