Guide: MA Caelum - Fear of Flying

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by MaxWilson

Compare Mounted Hirdmen to Helhirdings, though, or EA Sauromancers to LA Sauromancers. And I'm not at all sure that KO applies the rules across-the-board. I do note that the Bakemono Sorceror is probably cheap partly because it has lots of oldage (although IIRC good hitpoints), and the Celestial Master is cap-only (as you noted), and the the High Seraph has Flying.

Like I said, the correlation in cost for sacred units is much stronger, probably due to the fact that most blesses do most of their work in numbers, and that blessed troops make a far greater impact in the early game, etc.

Comparing across ages though I do not think is applicable, as there are additional considerations, which is why I only compared MA mages in my short list. There are special factors in play, such as age, abilities like healing or flying, and a nation's particular proclivity for magic. But my point was that High Seraphs are pretty in line in cost/power with most of the most potent MA mages, and considering that Caelum is a powerfully (though not especially diverse) magical nation, that I doubt High Seraphs would be more than 300 (320 at the most) if sacred, meaning that you would still be at a net profit after 4-5 turns at the most, over mundane versions such as we get now.

At any rate, I fairly cry every single time a High Seraph dies, especially if it's one of my coveted A4's. I don't smile and say "yay, now with less upkeep, I can afford another in a year or so".

So while I think it's fair to say that you are more rewarded for the continued survival of a sacred mage, I don't think you are ever in any way rewarded for the death of one who is not sacred.

[KissBlade]

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

Ultimately, I do not see anything close to a +50% cost correlation on sacred commanders, especially not high end mages, most of the time. On units it can easily be upwards of +100% cost, but mages vary so widely in cost/power between different sources, that I am not even sure that one can draw a direct correlation at all. What it comes down to, is some nations have weak mages, and some nations have powerful nations..... but the sacred mages are not always the most expensive for the amount of power that they possess.

As an example compare:

High Seraph - 6.1 paths, 280 cost, mundane
Celestial Master - 6.1 paths, 250 cost, sacred
Starspawn (blue) - 6.1 paths, 280 cost, mundane
Bakemono Sorceror - 8.1 paths, 300 cost, sacred

All of these mages are MA, all are recruitable anywhere (save the Celestial Master), and both of the sacred mages are better cost/power ratio than the mundanes.

Whaa???!! I BEG TO DIFFER GOOD SIR. Assuming we're talking about MA, I would trade that Celestial Master for the ability to even have cap only Starspawns. EASILY. As for EA, it seems unfair to compare the EA CM to MA mages as their effectiveness is scaled differently.

[KissBlade]

Originally Posted by Psycho

Wingless are nice to mix in with mammoths to boost their moral, but even better are longdead.

I believe undead morale doesn't mesh anymore with regular morale. (it did in dom 2 but fixed now I believ e) Edit: NM on mammoth flight, the spell used to just not work.

[chrispedersen]

don't know why people keep saying that.
Undead work just fine as morale boosters. I do it all the time with EA-Lanka.

Want those machaka to *never* retreat? Just mix in a few undead.

[Sombre]

Well I guess we need a test with documented results before people will believe anything either way.

It was /said/ that that tactic of mixing in undead to boost morale had been fixed.

[VedalkenBear]

KissBlade: Just a small thing, but I do believe that Jim was referring to MA Celestial Masters, not EA Celestial Masters.

On the more general topic of sacred/non-sacred commander costs (particularly mage costs), there was a definite correlation in Dom2, though that did not extend to the oft-believed +50%. While I have not done any extensive analysis on Dom3, I believe the correlation is even less.

I can understand Micah's point, provided he was simply discussing how an early death can disturb the break-even point between a Sacred and Non-Sacred mage.

Since a Sacred/Secular break-even point is at 15 turns (assuming +50% cost and equivalent abilities (thus meaning an equivalent base cost)), and that each turn the Sacred commander's total cost improves vs. the Secular Commander's cost by an amount equal to the Sacred commander's upkeep, it is easily shown that there is no time horizon short enough such that a Secular Commander's death would 'save' enough money to purchase another such Commander.

However, Micah's point is valid in principle, if not to the extent that he states. If you expect a commander to live less than 15 turns, then for equal economic utility, you should purchase the non-sacred commander. (As stated below, this analysis ignores the cost of the temple. Adding that as another fixed cost could validate Micah's point in full, though I have not seen where Micah makes that explicit connection.)

Note that this conclusion ignores non-economic considerations (particularly, the effect of your bless on the commander), and it assumes the +50% cost rule of thumb. It also ignores the cost of the temple required to hire sacred commanders. However, the formula can be modified so that a more general solution for the number of turns for the time horizon can be found for any given pair of commanders.

[Sombre]

Originally Posted by VedalkenBear

Since a Sacred/Secular break-even point is at 15 turns (assuming +50% cost and equivalent abilities (thus meaning an equivalent base cost)), and that each turn the Sacred commander's total cost improves vs. the Secular Commander's cost by an amount equal to the Sacred commander's upkeep, it is easily shown that there is no time horizon short enough such that a Secular Commander's death would 'save' enough money to purchase another such Commander.

?

Assuming 50% cost increase. 200 goldcost secular, 300 goldcost sacred. 15 turns later, 200 gold upkeep paid for secular, 150 for sacred. 200 - 150 = 50, 200 + 50 = 250. I don't see how that's a break even point. If the sacred dies in the next couple of turns, it was a worse investment (ignoring temple cost, bless etc).

[Aristander]

Wow! This post really makes me think about the possibilities. I never considered the idea of Leader/Thug squads doing all the fighting. I wonder if a similar strategy would work with MA Oceania?