Dominions Nations Evaluations ;)

[JimMorrison]

I would very much appreciate your help with this, please read on!

The rules for posting will appear below in the third post (second is reserved for future use). This post will be dedicated to the chart once results are compiled. Please read below, and then share your knowledge and experience so we can make this a useful tool for the continued growth of this community.

<3

[JimMorrison]

(Reserved for additional stats as needed, see post 3 for posting guidelines please.)

[JimMorrison]

It has come to my attention that there has been some slacking among the nations, some of them simply do not contribute enough to SP and MP gaming enjoyment. So to avoid downsizing, and make sure everyone gets the bonus that was promised, I would like everyone who is able, to provide evaluations of the available nations. The purpose of this is twofold, the first is to make an easy to use chart that new players can use to shorten their learning curve, and simultaneously hasten and ease their entry into MP games. The second is to compile the opinions of all of the more experienced players regarding relative strength and weakness of the nations, to highlight where IW could give a little love, in the interest of diversity.


Now, there are some rules, please read all the rules before contributing to the thread, though stray comments are of course welcome, evaluations need to adhere to these rules:

First, we are not ranking in any attempt to make a top 10, or any other sort of arbitrary listing. There is no harm in 5 nations being tied for top or bottom, there are no winners or losers here.

Second, I want informed perspectives only. Without a broad range of experience with different nations, you cannot expect to make accurate judgements about what weak and strong actually are. While we are not here to directly compare nations to eachother, the ratings are inherently relative, within the scope of the game. For this reason, I am asking that you not rate the nations of any given age unless you can rate at least one third of the nations within that age. Because of this rule, you are not expected to submit ratings for more than 1 age, if you are not comfortable doing so.

Third, you may post if you only play SP games, there is no problem with that. Simply do not include the MP score on the nations that you rate, I won't hold it against you. If, however, you are posting MP ratings as well, I would prefer that you have an adequate body of experience in MP. I don't feel comfortable quantifying this, but if you have completed several MP games (win or lose) in any given age, and you feel confident in assigning some ratings, then please do so.

Fourth, when I begin to compile the list from the posts (since I will be averaging results, I won't tabulate on the fly, there will be a window for posting, then I will compile the chart, with occasional updates over time), I will be looking for statistical deviations. I won't be looking for certain results, there are no right answers, but if someone posts nonsense ratings that don't coincide with anyone else at all, then their post will be disregarded.


Now, each nation will be rated in 5 distinct categories:

Early Game Strength
Mid Game Strength
Late Game Strength
Ease of Learning (SP)
Ease of Use (MP)


In each category, I would ask that you rate the nation on a 1-5 scale, such that:

1 = Weak
2 = Deficient
3 = Adequate
4 = Capable
5 = Strong

Feel free to post your rating in either 1-5 form, or using the first letters, W/D/A/C/S.

[Micah]

Late game strength is so subject to things like indy mage finds and how strong your early game has been...are we just assuming we only have access to national mages and a more-or-less even position with other nations entering late-game?

[JimMorrison]

Micah said:
Late game strength is so subject to things like indy mage finds and how strong your early game has been...are we just assuming we only have access to national mages and a more-or-less even position with other nations entering late-game?

The rating is based on what you are guaranteed to have available via the provided units and spells, and a potentially competitive pretender design. You can't count on finding any specific sites, or being granted any particular hero in any given game, so it is not a quantifiable factor.

[JimMorrison]

Thank you for getting us started Chris. <3

I understand this process takes a lot of thought, and a bit of effort to contribute. But the benefit to the older players, is that if we get a good chart developed, rather than explain the same things to people in newbie posts all the time, you can direct them to this post for these comparisons. They'll get more information, and more accurate information faster, and save you forum posting time for more in depth questions.

[chrispedersen]

damn thats a lot of work just to make an opinion.

Lanka EA 5 4 4 5 5
Tien EA 4 5 5 3 5
Hinnon EA 5 5 4 2 2
Niefel EA 5 5 4 3 3
Yomi EA 1 1 4 1 3

more late

[Twan]

For the two nations I've writen guides.

Arco MA

EG 4 (elephants ftw, but you may have difficulties against some bless nations or awake pretenders)
MG 2 (no easy access to thugs or forge of gem-economy items, correct infantry but need a lot of indie archers and mages on the field)
LG 4 to 5 (depending of how many astrologers have survived, and if you have found indies mages completing the nation)

Ease of Learning (SP) :
5 (you just trample everything with ethearal elephants) or
3 (if you try to use something else)

Ease of Use (MP) :
2 (you need to master communions and script very carefully for each big battle, and diversify to summoning paths for late game ; gems may lack for that without some efforts to developp an economy)


Utgard LA
EG 4 with a good bless, 3 without (giants... but you won't have big armies of them)
MG 5 (recruitable thugs, cheap researchers, nationals can forge clams)
LG 4 (everybody have thugs or SCs now, and others have better MR than yours ; BUT you have access to the three most powerful paths for endgame to compensate, and probably an huge income from clams at this point) I would have said 5 without Ermor and Rlyeh in this age


Ease of Learning (SP)
4 (you just kill everything with ethearal double blessed giants, but the cost of the troops may be a problem, and the nation is not as good with a weaker bless)

Ease of Use (MP)
3 or 4 (not really hard to equip thugs and script mages to buff them ; but the transition to endgame may be painfull if you rely too much on your recruitables ones)

[Hadrian_II]

EA Kailasa

Early Game Strength 2: Your sacreds can do a lot of damage, but everything that has a bow is able to kill you. You have the worst PD in game, so it is of no use agains raiders.
Mid Game Strength 5: Ghandaravas buffed with celestial music, are able to kill everything that is around in the mid-game, kailasa is easily the strongest midgame nation.
Late Game Strength 4: Nice 4 armed SCs with good paths for buffs, access to air, earth, water, fire, death, astral and nature magic guaranteed by national mages or summons, but death and fire coming very late. SCs are lacking HP. Sacred troops still effective. Nice nation for clamming.
Ease of Learning (SP) 3: sacred nation, but you have to place your troops right and use archer decoys to minimize losses. pretty much fixed research paths conj 6 for ghandaravas kinnaras then ench for arrow fend.
Ease of Use (MP) 2: very versatile lots of possibilities strength is hidden.

[Wrana]

Though relatively new, particularly in MP, I have something to say on the following nations:
EA Ulm 4 4 2 4 2 (as said, lack of uber-sacreds in EA, + low MR; no Astral, Blood, weakish Death. But troops are good enough & forge bonus quite good).
EA Helheim 5 4 4 4 2? (sacreds, though I don't use uber-bless, but common troops are strong, too; good Death magic, weaker Blood; in MP stealthy armies are more difficult to use properly)
EA Sauromatia 5 5? 5? 4 4? (strong overall, poison archers & Hydras can replace sacreds quite well; better Blood/Death than previous, + Astral)
EA Tien Chi 4 4 5 3 2? (good troops, great versatility of mages; good summons; learn to use any variation of mages can take a lot)
MA Tien Chi 4? 5? 5? 3 2? (as above except less mages variability & less summons)
MA Shinuyama 3? 4 4? 2 2? (no sacreds & difficult to get military machine going - need scales; variable mages can be a pain to learn)
LA Bogarus 4 4 4? 2 ? (their troops are actually not bad and mages give good versatility; Dominion kill is an option I think they should excercise; plus ability to hurt enemy economy - this could make a strong mid to late game. I still think they should be 2 nations, though.)