Dominions Nations Evaluations ;)

Zeldor · #1 July 14th, 2008, 07:53 PM

Amhazair:

Well, one experienced player is not enough. I was rather talking about obvious examples. You just need a scale to fit all nations. And then you can discuss if that nation suckss or it can get to so-so or even average with appropriate tactic [no counting awake SC].

And if Yomi deserves 1 I don't know. You'd have to compare them to Marverni, I think they are the real ruler of 1 point for early expansion in EA. I don't have MP experience in that age, beside blitzes.

P.S. I should do smth else than spamming forums, heh, way too much free time recently.

Gandalf Parker · #2 July 14th, 2008, 10:40 PM

Just my own opinion, but based on previous discussions all the way back to Dom1 I would predict that the result would be "we cannot agree". Which to me, is one of the most wonderful things about this game. There is lots of discussions about whats good and bad, whats a killer strategy and whats a worthless one. We all seem to agree that there are some but even after years we cannot seem to agree on what they are.

Great game!

JimMorrison · #3 July 15th, 2008, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Gandalf Parker said:
Just my own opinion, but based on previous discussions all the way back to Dom1 I would predict that the result would be "we cannot agree". Which to me, is one of the most wonderful things about this game. There is lots of discussions about whats good and bad, whats a killer strategy and whats a worthless one. We all seem to agree that there are some but even after years we cannot seem to agree on what they are.

Great game!

I agree.... hah!

But seriously, I do agree with your basic point, but that's why this is not a search for democratic consensus, but merely an attempt to statistically show a number that will be closer to most people's perception of each nation, than any other possible number.

Then a brief disclaimer at the top, and the average reader can peruse the list confident in the knowledge that they are less likely to be significantly dismayed with the rating than potentially any other method of finding out which nations will suit their playstyle.

With the side benefit that I didn't think of originally - people can say for example, "I really like EA Abysia", and then skim through the rest of the thread, and find the people who rated that particular nation the highest, and assume that there is a preferential bias, and see what other nations that they liked, with the assumption that there may be playstyle similarities they will appreciate.

Wrana · #4 July 15th, 2008, 04:37 AM

Well, you can consider to take weighted mean, for example. I.e., if somebody had consistently won with the nation in question, his estimate of it could be taken, e.g., double before averaging. Or, say, one more time for each time he won in MP with it (which can be checked in Hall of Fame). This will make more experienced players' opinions count for more (but if there are significant discrepancies with other estimates, you can lower their "ease of learn/use" score).

JimMorrison · #5 July 15th, 2008, 03:46 AM

Well the intent was to get a large enough body of results to let most discrepancies average themselves out.

Also, fairest way to deal with anything really strange (besides scrutinizing that poster as potentially insane) if there are enough ratings on that particular nation, is to use Olympic style scoring, and subtract the highest and lowest rating before taking the average. So if everyone rates at a 1-2, and a single person put 4 (even if it is the astute QM), then their score might be tossed along with the 1. Obviously this is only meaningful if the disparity is large enough, either 1/4, 2/5, or 1/5, a spread from 1-3, 2-4 or 3-5 is not going to break an averaging.

triqui · #6 July 15th, 2008, 01:55 PM

I agree with Zeldor. Bogarus with an awake dom10 wyrm spand faster than with a rainbow. Still, that does not change the fact it has a weak early game, it does indeed confirm it: it "needs" an awake SC to expand. In the mean while, a skinshifter vanheim with a Dom10 wyerm will still expand twice as fast if not faster.

I think Yomi is not that bad expanding as maverni. They have a very cost effective archer, which in EA is enough to take down most indis thanks to low level armor. However, _IF_ we rate "early game" as "expansion+rush or rush defense" then they probably deserve a 1, 2 at max. Becouse before you can cast Flame Arrow, bakemono archers wont stop a dual bless nation by any means.

Wrana · #7 July 15th, 2008, 02:08 PM

And marverni has slingers for the same purpose! So what?

triqui · #8 July 15th, 2008, 02:11 PM

So slingers have a much shorter range than shortbows and are a much weaker weapon?

Zeldor · #9 July 15th, 2008, 05:15 PM

triqui:

I can somehow maybe agree to put flamin arrows use into early game if they have natural F3 mages, not small cahnce to get them. But even with that, Flaming Arrows are enchant4, a bit far...

Tifone · #10 July 15th, 2008, 05:28 PM

Yep usually when you get to 4 in some magic school, you start to consider yourself in mid-game, as you can start putting on the battlefield some real magical tactics to support your troops

And triqui about slingers I heard many say that they are useful against some kind of troops, I don't think I can give you a complete answer about what those troops are, but I can tell you as the sling takes only one hand, some slingers have slings in addition to a melee weapon and a shield! If set to fire archers or attack archers, they can shoot them with their slings, suffering much less from the return fire of archers' arrows as they can parry them with the shield, and when they end ammunitions or reach them just start bashing the archers