Is the REAL problem with VQs...Norfleet?

[Reverend Zombie]

The one name that seems to pop up multiple times in relation to the VQ balance debate is Norfleet. Sure, lots of people seem to be using VQs in MP, but how well has anyone other than Norfleet actually done with them?

Is the whole debate generated by players who are frustrated at not being able to beat Norfleet when he plays a VQ?

How many people are playing VQs because they have heard of one player's success with them, yet cannot duplicate that success for themselves?

Please feel free to post results of your success, or lack thereof, with VQs here. Don't forget to mention the skill level of your opponents, please.

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally posted by Reverend Zombie:
The one name that seems to pop up multiple times in relation to the VQ balance debate is Norfleet.

Well Ive always said that there isnt a "best" nation or strategy in Dom2. Whats best is to find the combo which is most like your method of play. So maybe Norfleet has found his combo and is playing against many people who havent?

[rabelais]

Heh.

Norfleet to my knowledge just pioneered the SC naked VQ castling and templing strat, he isn't *morally* responsible for it in some sinister way.

The problem is the leverage between immortality, no per use investment+ no risk SC's... and dominion, especially for ermor, who recruits independent of scales.

I think he deserves a cookie for finding a way to break the game,... (keeps the balance faithful humble ) but that doesn't mean we shouldn't repair the defect (and its derivable cousins), now that we know it exists.


Rabe the Suprised at the ad hominem.

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally posted by rabelais:
I think he deserves a cookie for finding a way to break the game,... (keeps the balance faithful humble ) but that doesn't mean we shouldn't repair the defect (and its derivable cousins), now that we know it exists.

Why do you do that? Is it reverse psychology? Do you maybe really NOT want it fixed?

[ May 06, 2004, 17:56: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

[archaeolept]

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:

quote:

---

Originally posted by rabelais:
I think he deserves a cookie for finding a way to break the game,... (keeps the balance faithful humble ) but that doesn't mean we shouldn't repair the defect (and its derivable cousins), now that we know it exists.

Why do you do that? Is it reverse psychology? Do you maybe really NOT want it fixed?

---

what?

rabe's post seemed pretty straight-forward

of course, many people have never encountered an adequate rendition of this strategy...

Anyways, the problem is certainly not Norfleet; which is not to say that Norfleet doesn't have problems...

he did invent the pure strat as far as i can tell, and he is also very experienced w/ it, which does make it seem stronger than it otherwise might be. However, stronger than way too strong...

for instance, reading the supposed "counters" in the counter thread mostly make me laugh as, for the most part, they would be pretty useless, or require vast amounts of resources compared to the reward, when used against someone who has mastered this strat - for instance, Norfleet.

[ May 06, 2004, 18:05: Message edited by: archaeolept ]

[Tuidjy]

As far as I am concerned, Norfleet is the problem.
It is not impossible to beat a vampire queen, but
it is a pretty tall order to beat someone who is
significantly better than you.

I am a new player. I have played less than five
games outside of my circle of friends. In my
second game, Cohen obliterated my best army with
a single vampire queen. In my next game, I
raided his temples, my stealth preachers rolled
over his domain, and my pretender was a match
for his. He conceeded the game after losing
two castles.

Is the vampire queen one of the best pretenders?
Absolutely.

Is the vampire queen too much bang for the buck?
Possibly, I am not yet qualified to judge.

But if a total newbie like me can take on a
vampire queen in his third game and win, she is
no magic bullet. Yes, she wiped out the one
raiding party she caught. Yes, she is queen of
her own domain. Yes, she is very good at helping
early expension, yes, she allows you some peace
of mind with her immortality.

But guess what, we are playing a game about beings
that aspire to Godhood. It is normal that they
will be able to devastate armies of mere mortals,
especially in a province where the population's
belief empowers them. I love the way this all
fits with the theme of the game.

But something else that fits is that a God is only
as strong as his believers. A raided, pillaged,
besieged nation will fall.

I have since won another game in which the vampire
queen was used as a silver bullet. I got lucky,
and a unscripted petrify or paralize or something
nailed her. My opponent got frustrated and
quit...

But this is not how Norfleet and I assume every
skilled player will use her. No they will fortify
while expanding, they will hoard gems and mass
produce clams, they will raid and blood hunt even
when not a blood nation, and they use a stream
of annying summons to keep you of balance.

And you know what? They could do the same with
Odin, Shiva, a Carrior Dragon... you know what?
Maybe with a lucky Drott who rolled water
as his random pick and toughness as his heroic
ability.

Now do you honestly believe that when a much
better player beats you he only won by using
an unbalanced strategy? Now how many of you can
honestly say: "If I play Soul Gate Ermor with a
Vampire Queen, I will obliterate Vanheim led by
Odin... played by anyone"? Or Arcoscephale
led by Shiva?

The select few who can say this will probably
beat the rest of us anyway.

Now the Vampire Queen is good, and not that
expensive. And she combines a lot of nice things,
and maybe she needs rebalancing... But who will
be next in line for nerfing? I'll tell you.

Whoever the best players pick. If I were one, I
would pick a suboptimal pretender just to screw
with people. But the best players do not make
suboptimal choices...

... And probably do not write long rants. So see
you around.