.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

Raging Tiger- Save $9.00
World Supremacy- Save $9.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > Illwinter Game Design > Dominions 3: The Awakening

View Poll Results: Vote on the following items
Hammers should be removed 26 39.39%
Hammers shouldn't be removed 37 56.06%
Dousing Rods should be removed 29 43.94%
Dousing Rods shouldn't be removed 31 46.97%
Gem Gens should be removed 50 75.76%
Gem Gens shouldn't be removed 14 21.21%
Bonus 30%+ Sites should be removed 28 42.42%
Bonus 30%+ Sites shouldn' be removed 33 50.00%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 66. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old December 1st, 2010, 02:23 PM

PriestyMan PriestyMan is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 317
Thanks: 16
Thanked 18 Times in 11 Posts
PriestyMan is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Vote

Quote:
Originally Posted by quantum_mechani View Post
Personally, I would be quite interested in knowing how much opposition to the hammer change is on principle, vs unaddressed balance repercussions.
I think a lot of the votes are the balance reason. the SDR change hurts some nations a lot, but the hammer change utterly annihilates a few nations. unless they get massive boosts, i think there will be massive opposition to this. my vote for example was not based on principle bu balance
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old December 1st, 2010, 02:27 PM
Gandalf Parker's Avatar

Gandalf Parker Gandalf Parker is offline
Shrapnel Fanatic
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Vacaville, CA, USA
Posts: 13,736
Thanks: 341
Thanked 479 Times in 326 Posts
Gandalf Parker is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Vote

Id rather not see anything removed. A tactic or a strategy is just that.
A balancing tweak has been, and I feel should continue to be, about how MUCH it gets used. Not the fact that it gets used.

Usually pretenders, units, equipment, etc have been tweaked to make them appear less or more in the game. Cant such items be made more expensive? Make it so that using the strategy takes more dedication and investment to get it, to the detriment of other factors (such as defense and research) so that opponents strategies have more of a chance against it.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old December 1st, 2010, 02:28 PM

quantum_mechani quantum_mechani is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
quantum_mechani is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Vote

Actually, calling them 'removed' bugs me a bit. All things mentioned here (except the sites) have simply been made unique.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old December 1st, 2010, 02:41 PM

Calahan Calahan is offline
BANNED USER
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: San Francisco, nr Wales
Posts: 1,539
Thanks: 226
Thanked 296 Times in 136 Posts
Calahan is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Vote

Quote:
Originally Posted by quantum_mechani View Post
Personally, I would be quite interested in knowing how much opposition to the hammer change is on principle, vs unaddressed balance repercussions.
I'm around 90% against the Hammer ban due to my opinion that it removes an entire area of strategy from the game (balance issues can likely be modded), while also punishing good players who are capable of thinking ahead, and rewarding stupid players who can't. (with regards what items they might want in a few turns time)

As without hammers you can just mass forge whatever you need the turn before you need them, without any forethought required at all to ensure you've forged what you need before hand at maximum efficiency. And I don't think I could ever support a change in a non-broken mechanic that dumbs the game down. (gem-gens in theory is a strategy, as you're investing gems for a long-term gain. But were simply broken in the form they were in)

And all the talk of no hammers cutting MM is BS IMO. Since at least for me, hammer time in late game only accounts for about 1% of the time spent on doing turns. In fact, as yet I haven't actually seen any creditable argument for removing hammers that I agree with.


I was writing a post for the CBM thread explaining in more detail this problem, but paused it when I realised I didn't have much interest for the changes CBM 1.7 made in general. So personally I will be sticking to 1.6 for quite some time, as 1.7 is a step backwards for the mod IMO, and goes against what I thought the aim of the mod was in making more strategies viable. (and not about removing MM from the game). As now all strategies involving non-essential items are almost all unviable IMO

(All just my opinion of course, and I think as long as the creator of the mod is happy with any changes, then that is really all that should matter)


Edit - Changed 99% to 90%, as I am concerned about balance issues as well, especially how non-earth uber nations now don't need awake/dormant pretender to stop wasting gems on forging without hammers. As I see no easy way to fix this.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Calahan For This Useful Post:
  #15  
Old December 1st, 2010, 02:42 PM

13lackGu4rd 13lackGu4rd is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 712
Thanks: 5
Thanked 40 Times in 32 Posts
13lackGu4rd is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Vote

Quote:
Originally Posted by quantum_mechani View Post
Personally, I would be quite interested in knowing how much opposition to the hammer change is on principle, vs unaddressed balance repercussions.
I don't think the major opposition is due to principle, otherwise SDRs and gem gens would also be more popular to stay. the way I see it there are 2 main balance repercussions though, the first is national balance, by giving nations with mainly earth magic another advantage over the blood and death powerhouses, who usually lack in earth magic for early mass hammer production. the second is item balance, as some items either become too expensive or redundant altogether by forging them without hammers. other items become even better, especially the cheap effective items such as the brands, basic shields like vine and eye, etc, by taking their more expensive alternatives out of reach for most nations, especially in mass quantity.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old December 1st, 2010, 02:58 PM
Gandalf Parker's Avatar

Gandalf Parker Gandalf Parker is offline
Shrapnel Fanatic
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Vacaville, CA, USA
Posts: 13,736
Thanks: 341
Thanked 479 Times in 326 Posts
Gandalf Parker is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Vote

I understand the irritation of unique being referred to as removed.
But on the other hand it might also be worth noting how many people do seem to consider unique=remove as far as the usefulness of these items.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old December 1st, 2010, 03:46 PM

nerozero nerozero is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 46
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
nerozero is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Vote

Couldn't hammers just be made more expensive, if they cost 50 gems or something then they would be a little rarer, so it would be difficult to get a large amount of them.

The investment in a hammer in the game repays itselfs after just a few turns, it just seems like a no brainer to make them, with a higher gem cost you might be forced to decide between short and long term gains. This could really go for all the items we are talking about here to be honest.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old December 1st, 2010, 03:55 PM

rabelais rabelais is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: houston TX
Posts: 493
Thanks: 32
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
rabelais is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Vote

Does unique mean just that they are lvl 8 or that there can be only one in existence? are the costs of the item affected?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old December 1st, 2010, 04:48 PM

Valerius Valerius is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,046
Thanks: 83
Thanked 215 Times in 77 Posts
Valerius is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Vote

Quote:
Originally Posted by rabelais View Post
Does unique mean just that they are lvl 8 or that there can be only one in existence?
Both are true: level 8 makes the item unique.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rabelais View Post
are the costs of the item affected?
Forge cost is independent of construction level.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old December 1st, 2010, 04:58 PM
GrudgeBringer's Avatar

GrudgeBringer GrudgeBringer is offline
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 1,460
Thanks: 13
Thanked 10 Times in 10 Posts
GrudgeBringer is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Vote

Just my take on hammers...

I voted to keep them. At the same time, if your Abysia, Sauro (for the most part) and a number of other nations you are pretty well screwed OR you have your pretender forging them when he could be doing a lot of things better suited.

I would say to make 3 kinds of hammers (just a number), if you were going to change anything and keep the (hammers). Have them in different pathes so that most if not ALL could forge 1 of the 3. You could make them different, say...you make the normal Hammer give Earth 5% more benifit. Hammer 2 might get Fire or death an additional 5% or some perk. And the same for hammer 3.

THAT would open up a lot of different pretender designs and not have the Earth nations get a HUGE jump.

(Me, I usually play Earth nations anyway, but I just thought that might be a neat idea. Of course, someone with some idea of what is going on (which does NOT include me), would have to make the choices, and then a mod etc etc. Sounds like a hell of a lot of work)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2024, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.