Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Culise]

If you have decided to go with C'tis, I'll probably go with tradition and play T'ien Ch'i. 

As for a map, random is fine with me.  I tend to prefer more provinces per player by default (12-15 by a minimum, but I'm probably one of the handful of people who played Oeridia regularly, so...), but it's very much not a demand because I'm well aware I'm an outlier in that respect.  As for your requests, I was actually thinking of asking for a higher magic count fairly close to this since it's outside of my usual parameters, but I didn't want to seem pushy.  I don't especially play with mods outside of CBM in Dominions 3, but Worthy Heroes was included in that particular mod, so I have no objection to it.  I don't really see the point in reducing sail distance since those countries typically aren't overly powerful to start with (Midgard can get half-decent, but alas, poor Marignon), but I won't exactly push on the matter if it's preferred.

[Delta Foxtrot]

Are we going to use easy research? Vanilla values heavily favour bless rushes. Easy research should balance it out a bit. Then there's Very Easy research but I'd rather get a few games down with Easy research before trying out that.

[tompliss]

Are we going to use easy research? Vanilla values heavily favour bless rushes. Easy research should balance it out a bit.

The thing is, Easy research really changes the game (from what I gather from SP and reading the forums). So we'll have to make sure everybody wants it.
I know I'd like to play a MP game with it, and this may be the one.

[DarkerDark]

I'd love to join one of these Bay12 Dominions games, but I think I'm still too much of a noob. I still have to get acquainted with the different nations (So far I'm only familiar with the Middle Age), yet the AI doesn't really provide much of a challenge at all since it doesn't use any of the fancy magic strategies the game has to offer.

If you guys decide to start a MA game, let me know!

[tompliss]

If you guys decide to start a MA game, let me know!

There are some "noob-only" game, sometime, even if I don't knwo whether the next one will be soon...
After all, there are 4 games running, if we count this one.
And the next one may not be a noob-only (as there are nearly half the players of the last noob-only one registering). And it may not be MA either (4.07 was, so 4.09 should be EA, if we continue in the usual order)...

[HopFlash]

I've never tried different settings like easy research etc. because normally I think the game is balanced with default settings...but if we play with some special settings it's fine...I only need a little bit time to tune my pretender and tactic.

[tompliss]

Well, it seems that we're going to wait until monday/tuesday anyway

[Delta Foxtrot]

I've never tried different settings like easy research etc. because normally I think the game is balanced with default settings...

Balanced for what? 1v1 duel? 8 player free-for-all? 16 player free-for-all? 2v2v2v2 disciple game? 3v3v3v3v3v3 disciple? 6v6 disciple? 10 provinces per player? 15? 20+?

What I mean to say is, there's a lot of ways to play dominions and the default settings can't hope to work with them all equally well. And that's assuming Illwinter guys are good at balancing multiplayer in the first place. When it comes to multiplayer, Dominions isn't Starcraft. I'm sure we can all agree on that.

I don't know if Easy research is better or worse for the game. I've never played with it. I'd like to get an opportunity to give it a shot. As I earlier mentioned, I strongly believe that the current pace with normal research favours early bless builds a bit too much since the magic to counter them takes longer to research than it takes for a bless guy to rush his first target or two. Anything that pushes that a bit in the other direction (like easy research) is a good thing in my book until proven otherwise.

--

Anyway, I came here to post about throne stuff. I'm fairly lax about what types and how many we have except for few things.
I'd prefer if we avoided lvl3 thrones. Either they just don't work (super dom spread) or are a bit too good for a fun game all around (awe and crazy gem thrones).
Likewise I would strongly advise for 50% or less throne points to win. Any more and you're effectively fighting for total map control. Might as well ditch the thrones as a victory condition at that point.

But beyond that, level 1's, level 2's, one per player, half a dozen per player. It's all good. A few good-to-know bits however:
Most (all?) thrones that give mage recruits are lvl 2. Some of these mages are simply superb (metal adepts) while everyone is good for diversity for a lot of nations. If we go with lvl 1 thrones the effect of an individual throne will be lessened as none of them really expand magic paths available to a player. I see this as a taste thing. I don't really have a strong opinion either way, but it's something we should be aware of.
Then there's the matter absolute throne numbers. The more thrones we have, the bigger handicap we are putting on nations that lack
A) recruitable H3's
B) summonable H3's
C) mobile pretenders
Since I'm playing a nation with both A and B (and I'll be damned if I know my pretender build at this point), it doesn't concern me as much. But in general I would advocate for less thrones due to fairness. I wouldn't call any of the H3 nations exactly bad, so this is not a critical buff that they're losing.

[lijacote]

I'd like to see less thrones, and mostly at the first (mainly) and second (rarely) level. Manual placement for the win. So, yes, I'm in agreement with DF. In everything.

[Mindmaker]

Not a bit fan of faster research.
Mot of the time means that you keep getting spells your can't properly use yet (lack of mages for communions, lack of gems, lack of boosters) and devalues national troops (since mid and lategame is ruled by those).

I'm impartial to throne distribution, but I'd like to keep the Ascension points needed to win rather high.
Too litte and it's too easy to make a rush for victory before the midgame has even properly begun. Also it makes it too easy to end up with "too much" points, which just leads to a lot of finger pointing and ganging up instead of proper diplomacy.

[Culise]

I'm really not sure if I really want to go for Easy research; it tends to shift the game back to Dominion 3's massed mage-hammers and, as Mindmaker notes, devalues national troops.  I don't so much mind getting spells you can't properly use yet, though; those aren't nearly as bad as the spells you can readily fire left and right, right off the bat.  I also like higher ascension points, though I don't mind weighing them mostly to the first and second levels. 

I think, given the myriad concerns I'm having with the game set-up, both that I've voiced and those that I'm trying not to cause a player-kicking level of issue by arguing about, that it'll be easier and better for everyone if I withdraw my request to join.  I feel bad about doing it two times in a row, but that does also free up a slot for Moghopper. 

[lijacote]

I feel bad about doing it two times in a row, but that does also free up a slot for Moghopper.

There is nothing wrong with withdrawing. The game hasn't even started yet! This is like the last thing you should feel guilt over.

[E. Albright]

I'd prefer if we avoided lvl3 thrones. Either they just don't work (super dom spread) or are a bit too good for a fun game all around (awe and crazy gem thrones).

Actually, as of the last patch the multi-point domspread on thrones does work, which pushes the Throne of the Pancreator more into your second category. When you can capture a throne province at 6 hostile candles and have it at 1 friendly candle the next turn (to say nothing of what happens after that), it's more than a little destabilizing.

(Real-life example from round 4.04.)

[moghopper]

I didn't notice I was in the game

[tompliss]

I would strongly advise for 50% or less throne points to win. Any more and you're effectively fighting for total map control.

I don't think it's that much in that way, in a "small" game.
Little example with the 4.03 game (6 players) :
There were 7 thrones level 1 and 4 points needed (half rounded up). I played Oceania, and won, while clearly being behind most of other nations in military power until 5 turns before the end of the game,  and being at war with the most powerful nation.
Admittedly, I wouldn't have won with the current game version (because you now need to HOLD the thrones for one turn, as the throne claiming happens after battles, but I only lost 1 throne during the claiming turn, so with a 42% throne points needed, I would have won (or somebody else would have won, earlier in the game).
In a 12 players game, 60% throne points needed clearly means that the winning player would have won (90% of the time) a military victory a few years later, but in a 7 players game, I think that 50% of the throne points would be "easily" rushable by a triple-bless Mictlan or some early game power like that.

I think a 7 players 9 thrones (all level 1), 5 points needed could be a good thing, for a game that would force players to scout their neighbours (so you don't treat a throne-less nation the same way you treat a 3 throne one).


Oh, and about general throne number :
I think that 1.5 throne per player is a higher limit, not to give a big advantage to H3 capable nations.
And I also think that level 2 thrones are a bad idea (or that they should be in really limited number), as it quickly lower the number of thrones needed.
I read reports of a "blitz" (low throne number for a fast game) in the dom4mods game where I played (and was eliminated quickly), and the winner surprised most of the other players and said that he won because he was lucky enough to spawn near the 2 level 2 thrones of the game.


And about fast research :
We're used to normal research speed, and fast research will change the balance of the game, but I don't think it's wrong.
It can open possibilities to some nations (and of course reduce the possibilities of others).
I'd like to try it in a "pseudo-serious" game like the ones we have here.