refuting common wisdom on scales everybody knows

[Chris_Byler]

kasnavada said:
You don't know what you're talking about. What you just did was a perfect example of a strawman argument : the events you get from luck or misfortune from turn n do not affect turn n+1. Growth from turn n affects turn n + 1, therefore as you justly said, you can't compare growth that way. But you can compare luck effects since they are independant from one turn to the next. Same with order and production (and negative counterpart).

That's not true at all. Indy attacks on turn n affect turn n+1 very obviously: you still don't have the province, unless you send an army to retake it. Buildings destroyed by an event remain destroyed until you rebuild them. Population killing events have a persistent effect just like death scale's (only more dramatic). Free buildings, extra mines, and many other luck events have persistent good effects. Unrest events on turn n will affect your tax revenue - if you use autotax, it will automatically cut taxes to reduce the unrest, and if you don't, you will have to manually reduce taxes, patrol, or reduce unrest some other way in order to get your tax revenue back.

[JimMorrison]

Kasnavada, I hope you don't have a career as a scientist.....


Your 9 prov * 30 turns = 270 provinces for 1 turn is fatally flawed. You have been told repeatedly that events cap out. It's hard to say definitively if it's 4 or 5 or even 6 - that's not the point. The point is that even if it's 6, and even if you only reliably got 2 per turn with 9 provinces, your test would result in 60 events with the 9 province test, and 6 events in the 270 province test. So to clarify, you are theoretically (though not in any way -accurately-) extrapolating the effects of Order, you are getting 10x the Luck effect on the empire that is 1/30 the size.


Just.. stop.. arguing.. please. <3

[Omnirizon]

wow...

you guys are worse than social scientists and even historians; and historians love to debate, and they get mean man.

[MaxWilson]

@Jim,

On the other hand, somebody probably SHOULD run the luck test on more than 9 provinces, just so we get some quantitative idea of what we're dealing with. I'll try to get to it this week. If I do so, Kasnavada will be satisfied and everyone will benefit.

-Max

[Gandalf Parker]

Ive found it fairly playable to take negative luck with nations who have plus-luck gods and units available, and low domain.

Ive also found it playable to take low production with nations where Im concentrating on non-armored units (such as Pangaea). And low growth or high temperature for nations with lots of nature magic.

Usually not the most extreme settings +3/-3. Those I rarely use. But then again thats probably what +3/-3 should be.

[Omnirizon]

Gandalf Parker said:
Ive found it fairly playable to take negative luck with nations who have plus-luck gods and units available, and low domain.

Ive also found it playable to take low production with nations where Im concentrating on non-armored units (such as Pangaea). And low growth or high temperature for nations with lots of nature magic.

Usually not the most extreme settings +3/-3. Those I rarely use. But then again thats probably what +3/-3 should be.

interesting. why is nature magic a contingent for extreme temps? for the spell relief? do the "resist" spells (cold and fire) reduce or eliminate the encumbrance effect of temp scales?

[MaxWilson]

Supply. Nature mitigates supply issues--he's not talking about the loss of income or encumbrance penalties.

-Max

[Sombre]

What are these plus-luck units of which you speak Gandalf?

[MaxWilson]

Doesn't the Lady of Luck add luck to the province she's in? I thought she did.

-Max

[Omnirizon]

MaxWilson said:
Supply. Nature mitigates supply issues--he's not talking about the loss of income or encumbrance penalties.

-Max

of course. i reallized this as I was at work, having a "dom strategy" moment.

if you take cold3 order2 and growth1, you will gain net income bonus (even more so considering random temp flucs), and halfway reduce the supply issue; the growth over time will work out to even more income. I've never encountered supply issues, but I think that is my playstyle, as I prefer to use smaller armies with thugs and SCs.

If you can manage the supply somehow (like with nature mages), then large cheap armies really benefit from the encumbrance penalty, as the individual units would die before it had any effect anyway, and the opposing army will tire themselves out on it.