Please don't take my toys away!

[Keir Maxwell]

Originally posted by Zen:
Edit: Where is the love for taking the time to write it out!?

Thanks Zen. I'm in full on child care part of the week so getting back to Posts becomes slower. I do appreciate your effort.

re extra design points.

The point was relative to Dom1.

In Dom1 most races I designed had Order3/Luck1. I tried luck0 but never had the courage to play it in mutli-player due to concern over the horrific events you can get early in tests.

As an aside I think Johan underestimates the impact of losing population/gold early as the extra early gold is often the difference between expanding fast enough or going under. My experiance of MP suggests that early events (good or bad) have hugely disproportionate impact.

In Dom2 most races I design have order3/misfortune3. Thats 160 extra design ponts over Dom1 and that, in my estimation, is what makes the possibility of a wide range of bless effect races worth trying. Without the points only the most extreme temp races have enough points for the high level starting magic. Its not a question of quantative differrence in race power, as you suggest Jasper, but qualitiative - thats how the bless effects work. Its the level 9 ones the tend to matke the race desing viable or not. Got enough for the effects you need to make the troop type work - yay. Not enough and the race is simply lame. To me the difference in power between a tight race and a bitsa is not 10-20-30% but more like 50-150+% because of the way low casualty expansion feeds upon itself.

I'm sorry for not providing lots of concrete examples on this Jasper but it would take alot of work to do. All I can say is that the races I am trying to make work are very hard to get enough points for to make viable. To me this seems obvious but its clear its not for people who have approached things differently. I don't know what more I can say.

I realise that my initial post was just too flippent and not obvious enough in its humour. The whole post was supposed to be funny but obviously some people didn't get it - maybe you have to be spending alot of time around young kids to appreciate the joke. In future I will be more restrained.

I really do believe that a formalistic approach to balence which says that every feature should be individualy balenced with every other feature is just plain wrong. Its the overall balence and the possibilities this produces I'm concerned about and not wether certain options are necessary to get a good race. Does it really matter that much if most players take order 3 misfortune 3? I think the extra points from this creates ideas I don't think this strangles ideas. I do think, and have posted elsewhere, that cutting back the worst events is a good idea so I'm not adverse to any change and I am in favour of making turmoil/luck races viable. Its just that some of the changes recommmended would have disastrous implication on the overall balence.

Now I must withdraw from this discussion as, as you may have noticed, I'm not in the frame of mind to enjoy it, and why else would I want to post for? Doing some more work on my Mictlan design is a much better prospect.

Cheers

Keir

[Jasper]

Originally posted by Keir Maxwell:
In Dom2 most races I design have order3/misfortune3. Thats 160 extra design ponts over Dom1 and that, in my estimation, is what makes the possibility of a wide range of bless effect races worth trying. Without the points only the most extreme temp races have enough points for the high level starting magic. Its not a question of quantative differrence in race power, as you suggest Jasper, but qualitiative - thats how the bless effects work. Its the level 9 ones the tend to matke the race desing viable or not. Got enough for the effects you need to make the troop type work - yay. Not enough and the race is simply lame. To me the difference in power between a tight race and a bitsa is not 10-20-30% but more like 50-150+% because of the way low casualty expansion feeds upon itself.

There's the nub of our disagreement! I think it is possible to get to level 9 just fine, though not really 2 level 9s. In doing so you will have less effective scales, but IMHO that's as it should be. I'm not seeing the cusp effect you describe.

For example I've toyed around with a Medusa with 9 Earth, 3 Nature, 40 admin castle, dominion 4. This still leaves 80 pts for buying scales, which seems just fine to me.

I'm sorry for not providing lots of concrete examples on this Jasper but it would take alot of work to do. All I can say is that the races I am trying to make work are very hard to get enough points for to make viable.

I wasn't so much asking for lots of examples, just a particular example that you already had worked up -- something like the above Medusa.

I asked because I figured you were interesting in talking about your designs... Perhaps it's possible it could be made to work even without free points from Misfortune -- for example if Order wasn't so damn good it wouldn't be so necessary, and perhaps you could get away with Order 0, Misfortune 0.

IMHO being able to get 120 free pts out of Misfortune 3 after taking Order is just broken -- constraining the viable choices enough in these scales that they may as well not exist. Perhaps it would be interesting if Pretenders were built out of 600 pts instead of 500, but that to me is a seperate issue.

I really do believe that a formalistic approach to balence which says that every feature should be individualy balenced with every other feature is just plain wrong. Its the overall balence and the possibilities this produces I'm concerned about and not wether certain options are necessary to get a good race. Does it really matter that much if most players take order 3 misfortune 3?

Yes. It does matter to me whether the scales are roughly balanced. I don't want to always have to play an Order/Misfortune faction to be competitive. It's too great a reduction in variety, and it constrains me to roleplaying only one flavor of race -- I very much dislike it.

The first 3 races I considered for Multiplayer in Dom 2 are Pangaea, Tuatha, and Autumn and Spring. Pangaea despite it's theme is only viable taking Order, Tuatha must take luck, and Autumn/Spring must take Turmoil.

Moreover, I very much believe that far more variety is lost through the dominance of Order/Misfortune than is gained by effectively allowing Pretenders 120 extra points.

[Rainbow]

What is it about Pangea and turmoil? Is it a Pangea theme that is only available if you take turmoil, or does turmoil have some other special effect for Pangea?

/Rainbow

[HJ]

Originally posted by Rainbow:
What is it about Pangea and turmoil? Is it a Pangea theme that is only available if you take turmoil, or does turmoil have some other special effect for Pangea?

/Rainbow

In standard Pangaea theme, Panii attract Maenads in dominion with strong turmoil. In other words, you get more free troops the stronger the turmoil you take.

[Jasper]

Thematically Pangaea feels like it should have Turmoil. They also get many more Maeneds out of it, and without them their Panii really aren't worth their 350 cost. Plus, they get a better advantage out of Luck through Crossbreeding, and Luck is more potent with Turmoil.

I've just finished two games as Pangaea, the first with Turmoil/Luck, the 2nd with Order/Misfortune. Order is far and away superior for Pangaea, despite it's extra advantages from Turmoil/Luck. Order/Misfortune gives more than 50% extra income, and less bad events -- for the same price. Even the extra gems and items from Luck are more than offset by being able to afford more mages to search!

I generally try to play what I like rather than what I know is most effective, but I don't think I could bring myself to play with anything other than Order 3 and Misfortune 3 in multiplayer. The handicap of not doing so is just too great.

Now, perhaps I'm missing something. If so, I'm really keen to know what it is!

[Catquiet]

Originally posted by Keir Maxwell:

Does it really matter that much if most players take order 3 misfortune 3? I think the extra points from this creates ideas I don't think this strangles ideas.

Keir [/QB]

You get those same "extra points" by taking Growth +0, instead of Growth +3. Lots of people do.

One of the problems with the game is that the Order scale is so good, people see Order +3 as the norm. They need to reduce the gold bonus of Order to +4% per tick and remove Order's effect on random events. Then you could take Order +0 and make your cool pretender without crippling your nation in multiplayer.

They also need to remove the population killing bad luck events to finish balancing out the Luck scale.

-Catquiet

[ November 25, 2003, 12:17: Message edited by: Catquiet ]

[johan osterman]

Originally posted by Keir Maxwell:
[QUOTE

...

re extra design points.

The point was relative to Dom1.

In Dom1 most races I designed had Order3/Luck1. I tried luck0 but never had the courage to play it in mutli-player due to concern over the horrific events you can get early in tests.

As an aside I think Johan underestimates the impact of losing population/gold early as the extra early gold is often the difference between expanding fast enough or going under. My experiance of MP suggests that early events (good or bad) have hugely disproportionate impact.

In Dom2 most races I design have order3/misfortune3. Thats 160 extra design ponts over Dom1 and that, in my estimation, is what makes the possibility of a wide range of bless effect races worth trying. Without the points only the most extreme temp races have enough points for the high level starting magic. Its not a question of quantative differrence in race power, as you suggest Jasper, but qualitiative - thats how the bless effects work. Its the level 9 ones the tend to matke the race desing viable or not. Got enough for the effects you need to make the troop type work - yay. Not enough and the race is simply lame. To me the difference in power between a tight race and a bitsa is not 10-20-30% but more like 50-150+% because of the way low casualty expansion feeds upon itself.

...

I really do believe that a formalistic approach to balence which says that every feature should be individualy balenced with every other feature is just plain wrong. Its the overall balence and the possibilities this produces I'm concerned about and not wether certain options are necessary to get a good race. Does it really matter that much if most players take order 3 misfortune 3? I think the extra points from this creates ideas I don't think this strangles ideas. I do think, and have posted elsewhere, that cutting back the worst events is a good idea so I'm not adverse to any change and I am in favour of making turmoil/luck races viable. Its just that some of the changes recommmended would have disastrous implication on the overall balence.

...

Keir

I will answer your post even if you withdraw from the discussion, that way you won't be able to make a witty rejoinder and I will get the Last word.

First of all I still think that the bad luck events are not that much of a problem, not compared with the income loss. The 66% income of turmoil 3 to order 3 dominates the effect of the badluck events themselves. So if order -3 luck +3 is less viable than order +3 luck -3 it is in my mind much more to the constant income loss rather than the effects of negative events. It is highly unlikely that bad events will come remotely close to having as much of a negative impact as the turmoil will. I hope this doesn't come out as sounding condescending, but I believe many dominions players tend to overestimate risk compared to predictable loss, many strategy players seem to be very averse to random factors and I think this is reflected in the negative press the badluck events get. The sense I get from much of the discussion is that players worry more about the hurricanes and floods than they do about the income loss from turmoil.

If I read you correctly your desire is for pretenders with strong bless effects to still be viable. They are so in your mind because viable scale settings are more affordable than they were in dom2. What I think is the problem with your argument is that if other scales were to be changed so that you percieved them as useful as the order scale you would feel compelled to raise them as well. The design points you get by using misfortune 3 you get because you do not consider misfortune 3 detrimental under order 3, you get 120 points for free. Your bless designs hinges on that it is just one scale you consider essential, order. If I shared your estimate of the situation I would draw the conclusion that I should call for more design points and toned down order. If one only made the other settings as useful as you seem to consider order I fail to see why you would not feel compelled to pour design points into them the same way you do with order.

I too wish to see people spending points on pretender magic and bless effects, but I do feel it is unfortunate if it becomes a no brainer to allways go with order +3 luck -3. Since so many players seem to consider order 3 a no brainer it is perhaps a good idea to reduce its effectiveness in some manner. If income is reduced this would cause grumblings in some quarters though. And if the other scales are toned up design points will once again be concentrated in scales rather than pretender magic, which I, and apparantly you as well, do not not desire.

I have more to add but I do not have the time at the moment, so this will have to do for now.

[ November 25, 2003, 17:01: Message edited by: johan osterman ]