Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?

[Tris]

Norfleet has just made what I reckon to be the first sound and convincing arguement against the VQ being overpowered.

Given that I had become slightly irritated with constant defenses of "It's not overpowered you are all Newbies" and "It's not overpowered, there are counters" this is no mean feat

The arguement: That an SC VQ is not just 110 points. It is closer to 400 or 500 points.

This doesn't mean the VQ is not overpowered, but it is a good answer to the "but she only costs 110 points" arguements.

Norfleet: If you were playing against an evil twin, who would destroy the world and everything you hold dear if he beat you, and you KNEW he would play the temple/castling strategy, how would you play to beat him?

(of course, you don't have to answer, as presumably doing so would mean many people reading this could counter your favourite strategy )

(finally as an aside "Illwinter places a high value on X" is entirely irrelevant if we are talking about balance. If Illwinter decided immortal chassis should be free, to represent the fact they have less far to go to become true gods that would not mean free immortal chassis would be balanced)

Originally posted by archaeolept:
seriously, what sort of defintion of balance are you working from?

The one that doesn't invoke Popularity as it's primary reasoning.

But here's a definition for you:

bal·ance ( P ) Pronunciation Key (blns)
n.

1. A weighing device, especially one consisting of a rigid beam horizontally suspended by a low-friction support at its center, with identical weighing pans hung at either end, one of which holds an unknown weight while the effective weight in the other is increased by known amounts until the beam is level and motionless.
2. A state of equilibrium or parity characterized by cancellation of all forces by equal opposing forces.
3. The power or means to decide.
4.
1. A state of bodily equilibrium: thrown off balance by a gust of wind.
2. The ability to maintain bodily equilibrium: Gymnasts must have good balance.
5. A stable mental or psychological state; emotional stability.
6. A harmonious or satisfying arrangement or proportion of parts or elements, as in a design. See Synonyms at proportion.
7. An influence or force tending to produce equilibrium; counterpoise.
8. The difference in magnitude between opposing forces or influences.
9. Accounting.
1. Equality of totals in the debit and credit sides of an account.
2. The difference between such totals, either on the credit or the debit side.
10. Something that is left over; a remainder.
11. Chemistry. Equality of mass and net electric charge of reacting species on each side of an equation.
12. Mathematics. Equality with respect to the net number of reduced symbolic quantities on each side of an equation.
13. A balance wheel.

[Middle English balaunce, from Old French, from Vulgar Latin *bilancia, having two scale pans, from Latin bilnx : bi-, two; see dwo- in Indo-European Roots + lnx, scale.]
[Download or Buy Now]
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Here is also Proportional for you, if you haven't taken a gander:

pro·por·tion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pr-pôrshn, -pr-)
n.

1. A part considered in relation to the whole.
2. A relationship between things or parts of things with respect to comparative magnitude, quantity, or degree: the proper proportion between oil and vinegar in the dressing.
3. A relationship between quantities such that if one varies then another varies in a manner dependent on the first: “We do not always find visible happiness in proportion to visible virtue” (Samuel Johnson).
4. Agreeable or harmonious relation of parts within a whole; balance or symmetry.
5. Dimensions; size. Often used in the plural.
6. Mathematics. A statement of equality between two ratios. Four quantities, a, b, c, d, are said to be in proportion if a/b = c/d.


tr.v. pro·por·tioned, pro·por·tion·ing, pro·por·tions

1. To adjust so that proper relations between parts are attained.
2. To form the parts of with balance or symmetry.


[Middle English proporcion, from Old French proportion, from Latin prporti, prportin-, from pr portine, according to (each) part : pr, according to; see pro-1 + portine, ablative of porti, part; see per-2 in Indo-European Roots.]

[calmon]

Originally posted by Zen:
So anyone who wins with a Blessing Strategy wins because they made one with a VQ? Anyone who won a game based without a VQ did it on a 'longshot'?

I don't give the VQ a importance like that.

Please understand. I like just a little modifications to her.

...and i'm bored to see Hall of Fames like that:


Name.........Nation........Kills........Exp
Lysindia.....Caelum..........233.........65
Evelyn.......Mictlan.........199.........45
Francisca....Abysia..........178.........46
Lady Dark....Emor............150.........42
Buffy........Man.............102.........40


I do more like the game when people chose different characters and they are more or less balanced (not euqal!)

[ May 07, 2004, 08:41: Message edited by: calmon ]

[archaeolept]

I really can barely think of how to respond.

how does winning against a vampire queen imply balance? Vampire queens could be unbalanced (though the real interest/concern to me has to do w/ the full combo strat, not the VQ especially) and yet still be posssible to beat.

unless you take unbalanced as synonymous w/ "impossible to defeat"??? which would be a severe error in semantics.

edit: ++lol

thanks for the dictionary defintion and all, but
are you saying that the VQ is balanced because you can use her as a weight?

seriously, i think most people here are capable of looking up a word in a dictionary, but in the context of this game, what do you take "balance" as meaning?

[ May 07, 2004, 08:40: Message edited by: archaeolept ]

Originally posted by archaeolept:
I really can barely think of how to respond.

how does winning against a vampire queen imply balance? Vampire queens could be unbalanced (though the real interest/concern to me has to do w/ the full combo strat, not the VQ especially) and yet still be posssible to beat.

Maybe you are confusing "Possible" with "As easily done as fighting any other Pretender of comparable point usage and use".

Meaning; as possible to defeat a VQ consistantly (and repeatedly, because of her immortality as well as a few other pretenders out there, which you get to) with the same amount of effort that it would take to defeat any other For Combat pretender with the same points used to create, items used to equip, research researched to script.

The fact that you have to beat it repeatedly is only a minor factor if the rate of attrition of defeating it is greater than the cost.

Edit: Added "For Combat", so the "What about a Great Sage, huh, Mr. Smartguy?" rebuttle doesn't surface.

[ May 07, 2004, 08:49: Message edited by: Zen ]

[archaeolept]

Maybe you are confusing "Possible" with "As easily done as fighting any other Pretender of comparable point usage and use".

how so?

There is a whole other thread detailing it. If you wern't able to pick up any of those specific strategies, options, both listed and from your own personal experience, there is no way I'm going to be able to pummel it into your comprehension.