SCs other than the vq

[PvK]

Originally posted by Vynd:
... And that's only one other Pretender. Are there any other Pretenders that give you as much value (not necessarily as a SC) as the VQ does?

Well, I posted a list of potentially tougher SC pretenders earlier. There are also many potentially tougher SC summons. They can also take a strong dominion, and use priests, temples, and other means to limit the dominion of the VQ so the VQ does not get its immortality.

Some of us would say that rainbow pretenders have more potential than SC pretenders anyway. SC's can be cultivated, summoned, equipped into being, in greater numbers than one, and the more magic your pretender has, the more you can do that, assuming you can find other ways to conquer provinces at a reasonable rate.

Ermor building temples and castles everywhere, when their dominion undermines their gold income, sounds like the equivalent in skill and resources to being able to do many other things. Summoning more VQ's with Wish and GoR also sounds like something that would have many alternative uses for all those resources. So VQ's are tougher than Doom Horrors?

Unliving summons don't stop VQ's.

Note that by mentioning all this, I'm not saying that I think VQ's aren't underpriced ... I tend to think that the combo of their abilities may be. Though the Liches and Bog Mummy look capable of similar effects, no?

PvK

[Vynd]

Edit: Some no longer necessary comments about a retracted post have been deleted.


I think that all of the players, new or old, have a right to air their opinions. And this forum is the right place to do it. I do hope that people remain civil, since as you correctly point out, the devs will not pay much attention otherwise.

[ May 05, 2004, 22:28: Message edited by: Vynd ]

[Kel]

Just as herd behavior (not to be confused with herb behavior) doesn't make something right, lots of people doing something doesn't make it herd behavior

- Kel

[PvK]

I'm sure Gandalf isn't trying to upset anyone. He's just echoing a message that has needed to be said many times in the past, when (typically, new-to-the-game) players have ranted their opinions in inappropriate tones, and been duly ignored. Sometimes they may even have had a good point, but the result was just an annoyance for everyone. The lesson learned is that staying polite and making clear and logical arguments is generally very effective, particularly with Illwinter.

PvK

[PvK]

Originally posted by Kel:
Just as herd behavior (not to be confused with herb behavior) doesn't make something right, lots of people doing something doesn't make it herd behavior

- Kel

Sure. I was mainly just responding to the idea that popularity equals proof of imbalance.

PvK

[Kel]

Originally posted by PvK:
The lesson learned is that staying polite and making clear and logical arguments is generally very effective

Absolutely. I just think there is some confusion about which people need to read the lesson

- Kel

[mivayan]

Back to the topic of the post, what happened to the wyrm. Was it nerfed? At one time the wyrm was the "automatic choice" for SC and now I hardly see it mentioned.

I fooled around a bit with an 1150 -point rainbow wyrm. 300 hp and regen is fun. But you run out of fatigue in big fights and when machaka blinded it I had to use GoH... which can't be relied on in multiplay. And you cant put an elemental armor on it. But even a no-magic wyrm can probably beat a VQ early on. I'll test this... ok I tried it.. no magic-wyrm vs rainbow3 VQ. The wyrm's bite is not magical, the vq resists poison, and since lifedrain fatigues the victim the wyrm was soon passed out. The vq did not even get hit.

Pperhaps it isn't broken - but then, pls, we would like a general strategy to deal w/ the VQ/uber-SC + infinite castling + clam/wishes combo.

archaeolept - dont play in big games on huge maps against good players. That's what I will do when I start playing multiplayer dom again. A while ago I played against norfleet and gave up since the game was just too big for me and I ran out of ideas.. but I was not in a bad position really, if we had switched sides those vqs would most likely be killed every time they popped up.

The vq just needs 80 new path cost imo to lower the impact they have around turn 10-20. And some players will want houserules to not use them.

[Kel]

[quote]Originally posted by PvK:

Sure. I was mainly just responding to the idea that popularity equals proof of imbalance.

That's true, that popular opinion doesn't make it unbalanced. I might disagree, though, that the balance is more important than perceived balance.

If something is somewhat unbalanced in the game, at this point, it isn't going to be a game breaking issue. It's most likely going to be a small advantage that can be overcome with skill or luck.

The problem with perceived advantage is that it reduces variety in game play. That is much harder to deal with and requires you to limit who you play with and what maps, house rules or such you play with.

Now, of course it isn't smart to change a game based on a 'flavor of the month'. On the other hand, if it sticks around for some time, it reeduces variety and that bothers me a lot more.

I think it would be worse to play against similar nations with similar pretenders, most f the time...then to play against the occasional pretender who I knew had a slight advantage over me.

I guess what I am saying is, in the short term, you are right, band-wagonning is a danger. In the long term, though, popularity, right or wrong, does make a difference, at least if you play with that populace.

- Kel

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally posted by Vynd:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
This is beginning to tick me off. I cant believe that the new players are still trying to say this is some major breakage which absolutely has to be fixed. Even if that were true, you had better back down if you really do want it looked at by the devs cause thats not the way to get it done.

Are you trying to make people more upset Gandalf? Because that's what I got from this message. Seems to me that you're telling the new players that they are wrong about the VQ ("Even if that were true" = Not true), and that they had better quit their whining because it is pissing off the experienced players. Telling someone that they had "better back down" is how you start a fight, not end it. Nothing makes people complain more than being told they have nothing to complain about.

I think that all of the players, new or old, have a right to air their opinions. And this forum is the right place to do it. I do hope that people remain civil, since as you correctly point out, the devs will not pay much attention otherwise.

---

Actually it was in response to the previous post which started out "I cant believe the veterans are still trying to defend the VQ" which generated my response about new players loudly saying its broke. Seems like a balanced statement but pardon me, I have removed those Posts.

And Im not saying people shouldnt have an opinion. If I didnt think the devs should look at this I wouldnt be trying to tone down the remarks to a level that the devs will be able to stand to read it without getting pissed.

Its not the discussion itself. Its the way its getting discussed. It is not productive toward getting the changes people seem to want.

[ May 05, 2004, 18:02: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

[archaeolept]

archaeolept - dont play in big games on huge maps against good players.

Lol, yeah that works

ok I tried it.. no magic-wyrm vs rainbow3 VQ. The wyrm's bite is not magical, the vq resists poison, and since lifedrain fatigues the victim the wyrm was soon passed out. The vq did not even get hit.

ahh, the memories. now substitue "wyrm" for "all your early game armies"...