Conceptual Balance Mod v1.92 - Page 39

rdonj · #1 May 1st, 2012, 05:52 PM

You actually can still get magic sites with magic site settings at 0, too IIRC from when we did Overlords. They're just quite a lot more rare, so your cap income matters a lot more. And you really can't remote search at those settings, it's manual or you're just throwing gems away.

Soyweiser · #2 May 2nd, 2012, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by llamabeast

It does make sense, *although* actually it turns out that blood hunting income is related to site frequency (clever Illwinter!). So actually probably blood nations would do unusually badly if the site frequency was set very low. That could be compensated for by making a blood slave-generating special commander as well.

While it is certainly true the different ages get different amount of blood slaves. I was never able to determine how much the site settings influenced blood hunting.

So while there are effects, how much it is effected is not known. (Setting the settings to 75% does not increase the amount of blood slaves by a huge amount, and iirc it also doesn't increase the chance of finding slaves, but I might be wrong there).

Corinthian · #3 May 1st, 2012, 09:19 PM

I think this is because some terrain types count as having a higher magic setting than the one you chose for the game. Notably wastes and swamps will get + 20. Forests and mountains are thought to get +10 and farmland is though to get -20. Dont think this affect bloodhunting but you never know.

Anyway, does anyone know at what magic setting bloodhunting is considered to be neutral? This is important in order to calculate return rates from bloodhunting bloodsummons and such.

earcaraxe · #4 May 2nd, 2012, 11:05 AM

also altering the finding chance for blood slaves doesnt alter the slave income the same way as gem income, since it is dependent on other factors, number of "huntable" provinces being a prominent one. for instance if the frequency setting changes only the number of slaves a hunter gets a turn, one can just send more hunters to that province to achieve the same income as with a different frequency setting.

Corinthian · #5 May 3rd, 2012, 01:22 PM

Backtracking a bit, how many people have ever seen anyone cast the "Iron Pig" spell? Because I agree with who ever it was that said that the situation with Marverni is currently absurd for any nation that use size 2 units. And rather dire for any nation that use size 3 or larger.

Look!

A better price for these for marverni would be 15E for 10 or something. Maybe even more. The thing is, no other nation is using the Pigs so we might as well raise the price to be competitive. Currently its almost like buying Ettins from that nautilus place.

Torgon · #6 May 4th, 2012, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corinthian

Backtracking a bit, how many people have ever seen anyone cast the "Iron Pig" spell? Because I agree with who ever it was that said that the situation with Marverni is currently absurd for any nation that use size 2 units. And rather dire for any nation that use size 3 or larger.

Look!

A better price for these for marverni would be 15E for 10 or something. Maybe even more. The thing is, no other nation is using the Pigs so we might as well raise the price to be competitive. Currently its almost like buying Ettins from that nautilus place.

But its not like Iron pigs (or the fact that Marverni get iron boars) is a new addition to the game. It's always been there. Are a lot of games being dominated by herds Marverni iron boars? It's a useful spell, but so are a lot of national spells.

The current price of 4 E gems is reduced from the 10 of vanilla. It could probably use a small boost in price, perhaps back to closer to the vanilla cost of 10 E gems, but 1.5 times the vanilla cost is a bit extreme. I'm guessing that there was at least some logic behind the reduction and that they weren't seeing much action at the original price. Marverni still has a TON of other uses for E gems.

And yes the boars are more useful than the regular pigs. Much higher moral, and so less likelihood of a route through your own troops. But they still share that terrible MR stat. Is a just a higher moral really enough to justify a large price difference between the Marverni version of the spell and the regular version?

I'll admit that I'm a bit biased, I like Marv as a nation and don't like seeing them nerfed. I just think that as long as we're swinging the nerf bat there are probably other nations that still need it more than Marverni.

The main reason I originally brought it up was as a consistency issue. Since boars all have berserk now, the Iron boars should have it too. Now that would be overpowered at the current price. I would suggest doing two things, give the Iron boars berserk just like all the other boars and the boost the price (or decrease the amount). I still think about 1 E gem per boar is about the limit. Just remember what they're competing with: earth boots, earthquakes, crystal gear, armor, end game earth attacks and cyclopes, etc.

Calahan · #7 May 3rd, 2012, 02:04 PM

I've used Iron Pigs several times. A great little cost efficient spell IMO (and probably too efficient), especially for small raiding forces. I used them extensively as Bandar Log in a game I subbed into (when Bailz bailzed) last year, and was raiding high PD on my borders with just 7 pigs and a S1 mage.

Corinthian · #8 May 3rd, 2012, 05:19 PM

I guess we can (and by we I mean someone other than me that can actually mod) replace the Iron Boar unit with a unit that is identical with the iron pig. Then we can make a new national spell that gives units that are identical to iron boars, with a proper price on it.

Admiral_Aorta · #9 May 4th, 2012, 03:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corinthian

I guess we can (and by we I mean someone other than me that can actually mod) replace the Iron Boar unit with a unit that is identical with the iron pig. Then we can make a new national spell that gives units that are identical to iron boars, with a proper price on it.

I dunno, that's actively removing a cool, thematic thing unique to marverni just because there's a perception that they're overpowered without any evidence.

Corinthian · #10 May 4th, 2012, 10:13 AM

Admiral, I am not saying that we should remove them. Read again. I *am* saying we should move them to a separate spell that is priced differently than the current spell. Because the current spell gives hugely different outcomes depending on witch nation is casting it and is thus making the spell hard to balance.

And Torgon, its not only the extra morale that is powerful, although it helps. They have boosted almost every stat except MR. The main thing is that they have gotten 1 size larger and that they are tramplers. So they are prot 20 size 3, sacred tramplers for a nation with a national haste spell, that cost 0.44 E gems a piece.

And weather or not these things actually dominates games is irrelevant because I dont think most Marverni players are even aware of it. The spell does not show up as changed in the list unless you cast it. I did not even know of it before Torgon told me truth to be told.