Info: Blood stones and MR

[LDiCesare]

Here's a part of what the F1 screen looks like in gem-gen world:

I have more than ten times what shows here. Not many fetishes, because the disease handling is even more painful. Not that many bloodstones either because repeated armageddons (like ten of them? can't remember) made this turn 266 hard to find provinces with people to actually blood hunt in.
+1 to all what Calahan said.

And indeed, hammers are not gem-gens.

[Executor]

Originally Posted by LDiCesare

Not that many bloodstones either because repeated armageddons (like ten of them? can't remember)

That's me!!!

[Stagger Lee]

Originally Posted by Calahan

"Well then cast Flames from Afar/Murdering Winter/Assasian spells/Wish for Armageddon/etc. ie. Do whatever you can to kill what's in the fort."

The thing is, Cal, when one thing is removed, sometimes unintended consequences occur. Without those vast ever-replenishing resources, I believe assasians have become OP.

[bbz]

Originally Posted by Stagger Lee

The thing is, Cal, when one thing is removed, sometimes unintended consequences occur. Without those vast ever-replenishing resources, I believe assasians have become OP.

water bottle, phantasmal warrior, frozen heart, body ethereal/spells, rise skelleton, vine arrow(not as effective as other paths), entangle + 1 troop at guard commander , blind, bleed. And the most important outwitting your opponent, if he thinks that you are going to storm the castle, he will send his assassins, so instead of waiting for 1 turn(storming with the usual scout first), wait for 2 turns and storm on the third scripting your mages so that they can be safe against assassins on turn 2. When you kill the assassins storm the casle.

[Stagger Lee]

Originally Posted by Stagger Lee

The thing is, Cal, when one thing is removed, sometimes unintended consequences occur. Without those vast ever-replenishing resources, I believe ***-asians have become OP.

#sigh# I guess I should have used the cool link thingy like you guys.

[Valerius]

Originally Posted by Stagger Lee

#sigh# I guess I should have used the cool link thingy like you guys.

I laughed when you first mentioned it but I'm glad you posted the link because I had forgotten how funny the thread was, with a great line by iRFNA to top things off.

The other funny thing is Calahan is in the thick of things in that thread as well. Which brings me back to my idea of an "Ask Cal" feature. Does no one else see the potential in this?

[BewareTheBarnacleGoose]

Originally Posted by Calahan

Everything is priced with Hammers, because the game is better with Hammers, I only intend to play games with Hammer, so therefore I am using Hammer prices. And people who claim Hammers have the same negative effects on gameplay that Gem Gens do are almost as clueless as those who say Gem Gens are fine. As there is no way they can be compared directly like people tend to do.

Since Im the one who mentioned hammers, let me clarify that I didn't say that hammers were game breaking, just that I felt the game was better off without them. I totally understand that saving gems with hammers is a completely different animal than increasing gem income to insane levels with gem gens. My comment was that hammers, like gem gens, are too valuable to ignore in games that allow them- as you said, forging costs seem to assume hammers. Since you would have proportionately higher gem expenditure without them, nations without earth access MUST either take it on their god, or trade for hammers. I don't like this necessity, or the fact that any one item should be essential in the game, so I support CBM's decision to remove them.

[TigerBlood]

Originally Posted by Calahan

1 - There is no real limit on how many gem gens you can create. (ok, 50 per turn, but that is not a good limit)

Theoretical limit. In a vaccum there is nothing wrong with this statement. In the context of an actual game, there are actual limitations imposed by any number of variables. Given ideal circumstances, 50 free mages all comfortably established, a steady gem income, sure you can fill your lab up every turn.

Practically, at what stage does this occur in a vanilla game? Turn 150, 200? The only reasonable explanation for a game dragging on that long would be multiple players all sitting in the corner turtling.

2 - There is no barrier to entry on where you can build them.

In a lab. In provinces you control. Otherwise true.

3 - There is practically no barrier to entry to creating gem gens.

No barriers aside from paths, gem income and the oppotunity cost associated with devoting a commander to the task when they could be doing something else.

Just because these obstacles are surmountable in ideal circumstances does not make them nonexistant or insignificant.

4 - Return on investment is way too quick, and initial investment required is too small

Return on the investment...

You're not just pumping gems into the ether. You have to have a mage craft the item. They do that at the exclusion of another task. Suppose they need a ring to get up to W3, you're adding that cost to the initial investment. A hammer requires more gems. A Naiad, Nushi or whatever requires yet more gems. A Naiad creating a clam with a hammer is going to require a lot of time to see a return on the initial outlay, even cranking out a clam per turn. 50 Naiads with hammers is not a small investment. 50 recruitable W3N1 mages is not a small investment.

This is an argument against all the current pricing of gem increasing effects (especially globals, that all have a stupidly quick ROI), but with gem gens Fetishes pay for themselves in around 9 turns (or 6 if you pre-disease the carriers). Stones in around 9 (using 5.5:1 slave:gem ratio), and Clams in a crazy 7. That is all way too quick. And because the initial price is so low, it's almost never a bad idea to forge them at any point in the game. ie. If you had to pay an upfront cost of 110W+30N to get back 70 pearls in 7 turns time, then it's harder to come up with the initial cost, and you do have to think if the upfront fee can be spent better elsewhere. But if it's just an upfront fee of 11W+3N, then you don't even have to think about it. As an analogy....

See above. It takes an incredibly long time before you start seeing a returns on your initial outlay sufficient to perpetuate further investment indefinately. Assuming you're up against an opponent or opponents with a similar base gem income, one that is using the majority of those gems for more immediate purposes, who do you think is going to have the advantage? To be clear, I'm talking about turn 30, not turn 260+. It takes some fairly unique circumstances or active collusion to bring about the scenario you are alluding to.

Some problems on gameplay

5 - The defender advantage synergies too well with high Astral.

Yeah. In the land of the Turtle Gods, Astral is King. If you're going to leave another nation to their own devices for 100 turns, you deserve to lose. I'll also add that your Astral Misery Scenario can occur in a game without gem gens. Big nations unwilling to overcommit against a foe in case they overextend themselves or get ganged up on. Not as epic though, and likely to get stale a hell of a lot faster

6 - The income is hidden

Oh noes. Ban Blood. Hidden Income is Bad!

7 - They make conquering lands an irrelevance

You're talking about a paradigm shift in warfare after multiple players have set up perpetual gem generation forges. Territories are still important.

8 - They are Micromanagement hell

I disagree. Then again, my preferences lean toward blood nations. Putting hours into a late game turn is not an issue for me assuming the game is hosted at a reasonable schedule (3-4 days) once the game moves toward the late and end game.

It only becomes a chore if the game has been allowed get to that stage and I'm clearly going to lose via eventual attrition. I usually have the sense to concede well before that point, assuming other victory conditions have not been put in play.

9 - Games get stupid.

Once you've seen someone running around with dozens of S5 empowered Wraith Lords, and MLichs with 200+ HPs, then you know for certain that gem gens are just a joke, and allow players to stop even trying to play well, by giving them free reign to start doing stupid things. (which is not a good gameplay feature)

Unless I was the guy running around with a dozen empowered wraith lords, I probably would have conceded the game by that point.

....go and organise a load of large scale games with Gem Gens with various other disbelievers. Play these type of games constantly until you get to the point where you are all highly skilled players. Then organise another bunch of large scale games with these skilled players, where most game are lasting over 100+ turns with multiple players having hundreds of Clams each. Then continue playing these games even though a single turn in any game is taking many hours to complete. As then and only then can you come back in 4-5 years time and give your opinion about Gem Gens based on actual experience from high level games. As if you do that then you will have recreated the MP history of Dominions 3 that has taken place on these forums, and maybe then you will understand why those who have been through all of that, or even just a part of it, have firmly concluded that Gem Gens ruin the game completely.

Yeah yeah. I'll go dust off my brothers well used copy of PPP. You can go back to measuring your post count with whatever account you favour the most and pretend it means something.

A few final points...

...tl;dr - Just listen to players who have experienced it, and accept it when they say that Gem Gen items ruin the game.

I disagree.

[LDiCesare]

Originally Posted by TigerBlood

Practically, at what stage does this occur in a vanilla game? Turn 150, 200? The only reasonable explanation for a game dragging on that long would be multiple players all sitting in the corner turtling.

No. In the turn 266 game mentioned above, the only player that'd been turtling has been killed swiftly (well...) for turtling.
The game drags mostly due to one player (me)'s inability to take out opponent's forts while another one manages it but still. It also drags because bringing dozens of gate cleavers on a capital and hundreds of troops doesn't harm walls a bit, but the besieged player doesn't stay idle. The thing is that raiding provinces with 200 pop doesn't do much damage to anyone.

Originally Posted by TigerBlood

In a lab. In provinces you control. Otherwise true.

No. In a lab you control. If the province is besieged and thus controlled by someone else, you can use it too.

Originally Posted by TigerBlood

No barriers aside from paths, gem income and the oppotunity cost associated with devoting a commander to the task when they could be doing something else.

These are in fact insignificant as every survivor in long games managed to build lots of clams, blood stones and whatnot.

Originally Posted by TigerBlood

50 Naiads with hammers is not a small investment. 50 recruitable W3N1 mages is not a small investment.

You don't need 50. Plus after 100 turns, you've paid off whatever initial investment you made, without even considering Wish.

Originally Posted by TigerBlood

turn 30+

Games rarely end at this stage. They often last to turn 50 or 80. At this point, a RoI of 7 turns (Wish) is definitely worth the cost.

Originally Posted by TigerBlood

Yeah. In the land of the Turtle Gods, Astral is King. If you're going to leave another nation to their own devices for 100 turns, you deserve to lose.

When a player is being defeated and retreats in his last fort, he has little choice but to turtle. If you don't pick winning conditions like majority of provinces or something clever, it happens. Dominions IS the land of turtle gods. Even when you don't let other players to their own, they can still manage to get huge defender advantage.

Originally Posted by TigerBlood

Oh noes. Ban Blood. Hidden Income is Bad!

This does not compare. Blood requires hunters, provinces and population. All of these are easily spotted and it's easy to guess what kind of blood economy a player has by counting his number of provinces for instance. You can't do that with BS or clams.

Originally Posted by TigerBlood

You're talking about a paradigm shift in warfare after multiple players have set up perpetual gem generation forges. Territories are still important.

No, they are irrelevant at this point in the game.

When people reach the end-game after fighting several wars, defeating several opponents, they sometimes have researched all the way to 9 in every path and have had enough gems and spare wizards to start a clam economy in order to defeat some of the four or five remaining players who also fought some wars. It's not for people who turtled from the start. It's for everyone that clam-hoarding is a reality and a necessity in order to compete.
Seriously, when you have researched 9 in every school, you usually have enough boosters to spare a pair on someone who can build gem-gens without even planning it or turtling for it.

[llamabeast]

Look, if people want to act elitist, I'll happily play that game.

I hope that wasn't directed at me, because I spent quite a bit of time trying to give a good concise explanation when I could have just suggested you read the CBM1.6 thread where there are many many pages on this debate.

I know reading Calahan's post will probably make you feel aggravated (Calahan: people are less likely to read what you say when you insult them at the same time), but his points are valid. There was enormous resistance to removing clams, because people liked them. However eventually everyone got so tired of games with players having hundreds of clams that most people agreed.

Claims of hundred of clams are patently ridiculous except in those rare instances where every nation turtles...In a game like that, Clams are not the problem.

...And all this somehow puts the nation that invest in research, thugs and SC's instead of clams, at a distinct disadvantage? I do not think so.

If you're accusing us of lying, then that's quite annoying to be honest. There's no motivation for us to do that. Games with hundreds of clams were common. Why do you think we modded them out if they were actually fine? It would have been much easier not to.

You're right about the 16 turn payback time or whatever (off the top of my head I think it's 14 but never mind). However a mid-sized game can easily reach turn 80, and the exponential nature of the clam process makes it easy to get to the hundred(s) of clam point by that time. Once you've got 30-odd clams you can fund another clam per turn just by alchemizing your pearls. If you get Wish then you can make another clam for every 14-odd clams you have. So once you have about 40 clams and Wish, you can make 3 clams per turn just from clam income. Compound interest at nearly 10% PER TURN racks up crazy fast.