Poll: Is Clam Hording Too Good?

[Frostmourne27]

As I said I would in the thread on wish-kidnapping, here is a poll on clam balance. Specifically, I am refering to massed clams. I can't really define where clam horde begins and 'a few' ends, but it's somewhere around the transition from site income to clam income, IMHO. If you think that's a lousy definition, use your own, unless its something like, 'a horde is more clams than commanders,' or some such stupidity. Please do not consider other gem producing items.

N.B. The first option is not a vote about astral magic, just that the astral pearls from clams are too useful for their price.

[jutetrea]

While not possible, I would like to see some additional limiting factor dependent on the current number of either clams in play or clams in the possession of the forgers nation.

Cost increase, path increase, reduction of income (1/2turns), whatever. I think anything over 50 is excessive, but they did have to spend the mage time and resources to get to that point.

If nexus is the problem, fix nexus. If wish is the problem, fix wish.

[Velusion]

The only people that will really notice the problem are nations that get into the late game of long games. Otherwise I'm sure they think clams are fine.

It really is one of those things you have to experience.

[Micah]

They're important and probably a vital strategy in a large game, but they're not unbalanced. Diversifying is important to the late game, and that means that everyone will have access to clams and/or blood stones at some point, and once they do the income disparity won't continue to grow between natural clam nations and ones that have to find indies or empower to pull it off.

So it can be an important, maybe even vital, strat for long games, but it's not unbalanced any more than researching is, which is also a pretty important strategy for the late-game.

[Velusion]

Micah said:
They're important and probably a vital strategy in a large game, but they're not unbalanced. Diversifying is important to the late game, and that means that everyone will have access to clams and/or blood stones at some point, and once they do the income disparity won't continue to grow between natural clam nations and ones that have to find indies or empower to pull it off.

So it can be an important, maybe even vital, strat for long games, but it's not unbalanced any more than researching is, which is also a pretty important strategy for the late-game.

Micah is correct, however it does come much easier to some nations than others.If you get unlucky with your indy mages it can be significantly difficult to catch up.

In longer games you do not want to be the one nation without a gem item factory setup in the late game. 60-100 astrals per turn is huge.

It's the fact that clam whordeing is almost a required strategy in a long game that is unappealing to many people.

[llamabeast]

Yeah, if people agree that clam hoarding is a necessary strategy for long games, I think that's really not good. No strategy should be effectively necessary, especially one that doesn't require skill and isn't really fun in itself.

[Hadrian_II]

llamabeast said:
Yeah, if people agree that clam hoarding is a necessary strategy for long games, I think that's really not good. No strategy should be effectively necessary, especially one that doesn't require skill and isn't really fun in itself.

I think that rising your income is as important and that it does not need more skill as research does not make it a bad strategy. I think the problem is that some nations do have access to it and some nations not. In perpetuality, most nations have a gem income around 80 at turn 66 and if a nation is seriously clamming, then her gem income is the double of it. Now the nations that cant clam (or build earth stones) are a little (little is subjective ) bit on the disatvantage.

[Xietor]

KO has said that he never wants game play dictated to a narrow set of choices. On large maps, Clam hording-which is not fun-is clearly necessary if you want compete.

Compounding the problem, it requires zero skill, and combined with wish, can allow a "dolt" to win a large game against a superior player who refuses to use such a lame tactic. And it is a lame tactic.

[Jazzepi]

I don't think clam hording is a lame tactic. Honestly I don't even believe in calling a tactic lame. That sort of language is what bad players use in the arcade when they repeatedly get tripped in Mortal Kombat. If you can't beat a tactic, don't call it lame, adapt to it.

That said, I do think it is *boring* when there is only one choice. It should be made clear that almost every nation begins to become one terrifying amalgamation where late magic diversity means that everyone has access to all spells, so it's not surprising that the game slides into a single tactic state after a certain point.

I really liked Baalz's suggestion that there be a spell that destroyed all items of one type. I think this would make clam hording a much risker investment then it is now, where you're basically guaranteed income from the gems the turn after their conception. Obviously you could tweak the spell, maybe it only cuts the number of them in half, or some-such. There's only about a billion ways you could make it different but still use it to discourage massive amounts of clam hording.

Jazzepi

[Micah]

Researching pretty much fits all of the criteria people are complaining about, but I don't hear anyone wanting to take that out.

It is non-optional in any sort of long game.
It is harder for some nations to research than others.
It is not fun.
It requires about as much MM to set a turn's worth of mages to research as it does to forge and assign a clam.

The only thing it really has going for it is that it takes some skill to prioritize the path order.

Also, the UW nations (possibly excepting LA Rlyeh due to freespawn) have a hell of a time being relevant on land in most games even with clamming, something would need to be given to them to compensate if they were removed or nerfed.