After playing the elves...

[Chandrasekhar]

I have a game running right now as Arendel of Ljosalfar. I've let my opinion be known regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the elves, but I decided that I should also have some firsthand knowledge of how they play, as the AI and humans have very different ways of playing. I'm near turn 200 at the moment (it's a quick game), but I think I've played enough to start writing about what I've found.

Firstly, it's worth saying that the Ljosalfar have a very strong beginning in FfH. One hammer is pretty valuable in the early game, and once the first worker is out there, he can begin to take advantage of the elves' ability to build in forests (assuming that a worker tech has been researched). This is compounded by the fact that the elves' unique hero, Gilden Silveric, is one of the earlier heroes, being built at archery.

I found that Gilden Silveric, along with the extra boost from forests, made early game war incredibly useful. By year 100, I had wiped out one neighbor, and by year 150 I had destroyed the other. If the elves got a middle/late game hero instead of an early one, they would merely be strong in the early game, instead of nigh unbeatable.

I also founded the Fellowship of Leaves, as I wanted to see how ancient forests would impact the strategy of the elves. I found that the ancient forest spawn rate was actually low enough that they didn't provide an overly strong benefit. However, this was also largely because I didn't have many forests in my empire. A spawn rate independent of how many forests there are in the first place might prove to be a balancing factor, if this playthrough is any indicator.

Though I had the misfortune to start far from any incense, I did rush to commune with nature and built some duids along with Yvain the Wood Elf. I found that blooming your empire prooves incredibly useful to the elves. I would strongly suggest that druids, priests, and Yvain be required to spend some time building forests, perhaps like workers build improvements. Even then, it's questionable whether or not any non-national unit should be able to do this. Making the bloom spell linked to Nature III might solve this.

The +1 for villages and towns makes these improvements even more desirable for elves. I had an plains/ancient forest/hills tile with a town on it that gave 1/4/4. That's as much as I'd expect to see from a improvement on a resource, not something duplicable such as this. I'd suggest changing something about the way that elves get benefits from Arcane Lore.

Consider this: what if an elven town got -1 until Arcane Lore? Cottages built on forests by elves would effectively be the same as other races cottages built there except:
1) Elves would have double movement on them,
2) They would have +50% defense,
3) Improvements could be built more quickly (because the forest wouldn't have to be chopped down)
4) No instant bonus would be obtained by building there (because the forests wouldn't be chopped down)

Then, after Arcane Lore is researched, the elves still have the same yields in forests as other races do elsewhere, but they also still get the double movement/high defense bonuses. Farms aren't particularly unbalancing, and I actually like the fact that the elves have a small advantage with them until sanitation.

So, to recap, here's how I think the elves could be well balanced:
-Later hero, perhaps at bowyers. Increase strength, accordingly.
-An ancient forest spawn rate for the empire instead of a chance per forest (i.e. ancient forests spawn on average every three turns, instead of 2% chance of each forest becoming ancient forest each turn).
-Make bloom less accessable to lower tier units and/or include a work time that must be speant to make new forests.
-The above plan for regulating elves advantages.

Clearly, a simple nerf crusade isn't the way to go here. actually turned out to be well balanced, what with the river bonuses not being applied, but the hammers are a bit high. Limiting elven cottages to villages wouldn't solve the problem, only make the elves more based. Please consider my suggestions and give feedback. I'll post some stuff on the late game once I get there.

 

[vorshlumpf]

I like the idea to give a penalty of 1 on the production for cottages (etc.). The rest I'm not sold on.

- Niilo

 

[Sureshot]

i dont see the need for unbalanced nerfs or multiple threads devoted to the subject

i just played a game as the grigori against all three elf leaders at once, and it was the easiest game ive played, i didnt even need more then 2 cities, i just picked off their cities with my adventurer warriors, taking out two of them, then finished the last one off with axemen adventurers and dragon slayers. funny, as they had no way of taking my cities, but i easily razed every one of theirs without losing a single adventurer.

 

[Moon Hunter]

The elves should finally be left alone, they've been nerfed pretty much already...

Maybe, but just maybe i would give them the penalty for cottage and hamlet, but not for village and town... the elves do need these production bonuses, because they need bigger armies, since they dont have any siege weapons...

The fact that you had druids quickly and so on is dependant on your game...

In my current game, i had to make a big empire to keep in touch with enemies and ended up with a 10-30% research rate for like 150 turns. My empire was full of deserts and tundras, so it took a long time till i could upgrade the deserts at all and without bloom, the tundras would be pointless.

Let the elves as they are, there already was a poll on it stating they should finally be left alone...

 

[Maniac]

I would strongly suggest that druids, priests, and Yvain be required to spend some time building forests, perhaps like workers build improvements. Even then, it's questionable whether or not any non-national unit should be able to do this. Making the bloom spell linked to Nature III might solve this.

This would weaken all Fellowship followers, not just the Elves.

 

[Bad Player]

But how are you finding the Ljosalfar in the mid and late game with no seige engines and weak late game units?

 

[Piemax^2]

Chandie, I'm glad that you are playing a test game, this seems the best way to get a feel for how the advantages and disadvantages of the elves play out. And I agree that the elves have a strong early game. But I didn't see an indication of the difficutly level of your test game, or the map size or any other parameters except "quick" and in my experience these matter too. Playing on small/nobe/normal and any 1-continent map I can often wipe out most of the map before the lack of siege engines becomes a problem. On higher difficutly settings and larger maps I have a harder time. Also on harder settings I find that I have to delay archery and Gideon if I want to found the Fellowship.
I do agree that str-5 heros are very strong in the early game

That said, I can see a case for pushing Gideon a little later, say to an equivalent research cost of Runes (which unlocks another str-5 hero.)

 

[Piemax^2]

More generally, I think that the relative strength of the various civs depends on the difficutly and map type. People here seem to play on a range of settings from noble to emperor, is there a consensus on what settings to use for evaluating balance?

 

[Bad Player]

Although the hero is strength 5 in the earlyish game, all civs have access to the elf-slaying promotion (from ancient chants) and therefore can get a sizeable bonus (40%) against him and the other elves. Most civs are human and therefore it is unlikely that the Ljosalfar will have an equivalent bonus back.

 

[Grey Fox]

or +80% with the one vs archers aswell.

 

[Unser Giftzwerg]

Hi, last night I just finished my third of four test games. I've played The Clan/Jonas, Lunan/Hannah, and Khazad/Kandros. The last of the sieries is the Ljosalfar, probably with their cultural trait leader.

I've played these games to turn 200 and took notes during play. Each realm was started with boosting the production as a very high priority. But other than that, I tried playing the realms as 'smart'. e.g. If they needed to build a city to control a chokepoint, that's what they did. I wouldn't place that city just to boost the economy, knowing I was playing to only turn 200 and would not have to defend it later.

Games were played on Fractal maps, Large, Temperate, Medium Seas, Emperor skill, Raging Barbarians, Aggressive AI, Epic. I was not particularly picky about map starups, with one exception: Eavry game was started with a River with Flood Plains near the starting Settler. The operating philospophy here is that there are far too many variable that go into each game to directly measure them all. A practical way to evaluate each civ's stengths is to measure them while near maximum capacity. A skilled player can achieve near-maximum performance, but can never excede it. So I wanted to play these games on maps that offered a promising start for that racial type.

So the second part of the play balance equasion is, now hard is it to get this civ to achieve its maximum performance. In theory, a balanced situation is possible between low-potential/easy-to-optimize civs and high-potential/hard-to-govern nations.

The first 200 turns were studied for two reasons. The lesser reason is that tech variety is very limited at this stage, so most every civ is reacting to the same set of needs/dangers. 200 turns proved to be a pretty good choice. The civs start to 'personalize' themsevles around turn 140-160. By turn 200 the early seeds of specialization are just sprouting, but the differences are not yet so harsh as to make comparisons impossible. (Hope that makes a sort of senses.)

The biggest reason, though, is that I am a firm believer that the opening game shapes the endgame more deeply and profoundly than any other aspect.

These four civs were chosen to reflect four presumed advantages:

Barbarian Trait: Can start development right away regardless of the Raging Barbs.

Dwarven Vault: Dwarves get hindered in early city expansion, but OTOH they have a unique tool in their armory: gold.

Lunan: These sushi-snarfing surf Sultans get extra from each sea tile, talk about fast population growth. Now, add the Financial trait, and...

Ljosalfar: The love 'em / hate 'em civ of FfH, is their economic potential as strong as their critics say? The one 'must-have' civ in a test such as this.

Generic: Originally, I planned to run a 5th, 'vanilla-ish' Civ as a Control. However the Lunan game played out withthem acting exactly 'vanilla' for the bulk of the game. I believe the differences from that point out can be estimated accurately enough.

Last Stage:

The last stage is to try to remove the effect of the different maps. The results from game t game cannot be compared directly. Each game was played on a completely different map. But I have set up a spreadsheet that can compare how the different realms would develop on each map. I can simulate barbarian activity by slowing down / speeding up the appearance of new developments, based upon my game notes. It is not a perfect comparison, but it should be accurate to a couple percent overall.

So in the end we will have four actual performances, plus sixteen simulated performances. Each actual game will also be simulated, so we can judge the accuracy of the spreadsheet model. If strong trends exist, there should be some evidence we can see.

Unfortunately I am not finished. Won't be, for at least a few days. The simulations won't take any time to 'run' but they will be tediuos to set up and error-check. So I didn't want to post anything until I was finished. However, since I see another Elf thread, I figured I'd let folks know to expect yet another one soon.

 

[Unser Giftzwerg]

More generally, I think that the relative strength of the various civs depends on the difficutly and map type. People here seem to play on a range of settings from noble to emperor, is there a consensus on what settings to use for evaluating balance?

I think maps have the biggest effect. Game speed might count for more than I've given it credit. I play on Epic and have not really tried a Normal speed. But consiering the AI's early production lead at higher skill settings, faster research might make for harsher challenge. And game difficulty of course has a big effect. But I think it tends to be 'herky-jerky' There's a major change when the AI gets to begin the game with a Worker unit. But notch it up one more from that, and the difference in play is far far less dramatic.

But maps, yes, maps. I suspect differnces in maps causes a lot of disagreement in overall gameplay opinion.

 

[Unser Giftzwerg]

Although the hero is strength 5 in the earlyish game, all civs have access to the elf-slaying promotion (from ancient chants) and therefore can get a sizeable bonus (40%) against him and the other elves. Most civs are human and therefore it is unlikely that the Ljosalfar will have an equivalent bonus back.

If I could remember seeing more than zero AI units with this promotion, I would agree it is a factor. But I have never ever seen an AI unit with such a promotion, unless they were creating with it. (Am I remembering right?) :shrug:

 

[Sureshot]

Kael said the AI tends towards the elf-killing promotion if they are at war with the elves. And as the grigori i loved that promotion, it meant universal elf-butchery like it was nobodies business (and i had 3 heroes by the time they had gilden, and 5 by the time i killed them all, all of which were dragon slayers).

 

[Unser Giftzwerg]

Kael said the AI tends towards the elf-killing promotion if they are at war with the elves. And as the grigori i loved that promotion, it meant universal elf-butchery like it was nobodies business (and i had 3 heroes by the time they had gilden, and 5 by the time i killed them all, all of which were dragon slayers).

If Raging Barbs could live long enough to earn promotions, and if they started taking them right from turn 10 on, that would make things hot in Evermore.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

How easy it is to kill elves and how easy it is to kil with the elves are two very different things. First, the elf-slaying promotion has never been used in my experience. Also, the AI seems to be too stupid to focus on building in forests.

Maybe, but just maybe i would give them the penalty for cottage and hamlet, but not for village and town... the elves do need these production bonuses, because they need bigger armies, since they dont have any siege weapons...

In my game, all my nearby rivals were wiped out before catapults became an issue. This opened up land for development, which in turn increased the amount of Civ-wide production to a level that would have been beyond other Civs even without the boost from forests.

I'm starting to think that what Unser says about the endgame being so heavily influenced by the beginning is true. With no rivals still alive on my continent (it's a two-continent game), my expansion is unlimited, so it's just a matter of producing enough macemen to hammer through the defenses of the other Civs until I can get good enough odds with the heroes. Other Civs are just as effective at this point, but the elves have a much easier time getting here. This clearly indicates that they're too powerful in the beginning of the game.

What other Civ can you point out that gets such great advantages in the early game? As I see it, the elves are completely alone in their early game supremacy.

Still, Unser's experiments certainly seem more professional, so I'll be waiting on his results, as well.

Edit: Forgot to respond to this-

This would weaken all Fellowship followers, not just the Elves.

I don't see how it would weaken the Fellowship all that much. Forests give them happiness bonuses, sure, but it's not like they can use them for anything but that.

 

[Halancar]

I've played the elves, and made the AI bow before my power. On the other hand, I've done the same with the Luchuirp, the Grigori, the Calabim, the Khazad, and the Malakim. So if the elves are overpowered, they are not alone in it. In fact, the most powerful civilization, I found, was the Grigori and their adventurers...

On the other hand, after not playing the elves for a number of games, here is my conclusion :

The AI does far better with the elves than with any other civilization. As long as it starts in a decent place, the elves will outpace all other civs. This, I believe, is because the AI knows how to build cottages on forest, and will rush for the Fellowship of Leaves when playing the elves. On the other hand, the AI does not know how to develop and use a hero to gain the upper hand in warfare (so is quite average as the Grigori), nor does it understand the special power of moroi, vampires (calabim), wood golems (Luchuirp)...

 

[Chandrasekhar]

I've played the elves, and made the AI bow before my power. On the other hand, I've done the same with the Luchuirp, the Grigori, the Calabim, the Khazad, and the Malakim. So if the elves are overpowered, they are not alone in it. In fact, the most powerful civilization, I found, was the Grigori and their adventurers...

On the other hand, after not playing the elves for a number of games, here is my conclusion :

The AI does far better with the elves than with any other civilization. As long as it starts in a decent place, the elves will outpace all other civs. This, I believe, is because the AI knows how to build cottages on forest, and will rush for the Fellowship of Leaves when playing the elves. On the other hand, the AI does not know how to develop and use a hero to gain the upper hand in warfare (so is quite average as the Grigori), nor does it understand the special power of moroi, vampires (calabim), wood golems (Luchuirp)...

Yeah, it can be pretty tough to distinguish one level of ownage from another. At that point, you really just have to look at the mechanics and see where they're getting their advantages from.
Grigori: Early, free heroes, but no religion
Luichirp: Lower reliance on resources, but reliant on hero for promotions
Calabim: Vampires... not sure if there's any explicit disadvantage, though
Ljosalfar: Improvements in forests, but no siege engines.

I think the biggest difference here is that while all of the other Civs' advantages are strictly military, the Ljosalfar's also makes their economy a thing to be feared. They can expand and conquer a wide swath of land, then just sit on it for the rest of the game. They seem to be well suited for a Tower of Mastery victory.

I'm actually beginning to suspect that the Elves could conquer the world, though, if played with a strategy besides Leaves. Next up, I'm going to play as some very Orderly elves.

 

[Unser Giftzwerg]

How easy it is to kill elves and how easy it is to kil with the elves are two very different things. First, the elf-slaying promotion has never been used in my experience. Also, the AI seems to be too stupid to focus on building in forests.



In my game, all my nearby rivals were wiped out before catapults became an issue. This opened up land for development, which in turn increased the amount of Civ-wide production to a level that would have been beyond other Civs even without the boost from forests.

I'm starting to think that what Unser says about the endgame being so heavily influenced by the beginning is true. With no rivals still alive on my continent (it's a two-continent game), my expansion is unlimited, so it's just a matter of producing enough macemen to hammer through the defenses of the other Civs until I can get good enough odds with the heroes. Other Civs are just as effective at this point, but the elves have a much easier time getting here. This clearly indicates that they're too powerful in the beginning of the game.

What other Civ can you point out that gets such great advantages in the early game? As I see it, the elves are completely alone in their early game supremacy.

Still, Unser's experiments certainly seem more professional, so I'll be waiting on his results, as well.

Let's call it 'formerly professional'

I am eager to (a) play the Ljo game and (b) crunch the numbers but not so eager as (c) play 0.15.

But right now I would say the only comparison are the nations with the Barbarian trait. The Clan will prove to be clearly the worst-performer from a production standpoint. But it is really weird to be playing a No Barbs game during Raging Barbs. It's a "splashy" advantage in Kaelspeak. But it's not too hard to understand how early map exploration and city location choices can profoundly impact the endgame. (I would not play a Barb trait civ again after this experience, except perhaps on a smallish map. It's just 'not fun' to play a Raging Barbs game and not have to worry about Barbs. )

The Khazad were once again a lot of fun. The trick to playing them is to not think of the Vault as a 'penalty'. Think of it as special extra invention on the tech tree. After you have 3-4 cities up, each is usually at the happycap. So turn R&D down to 0% until you've earned 300-400 gold. 1 gold is roughly equal to one beaker at this stage, so that's a pretty cheap "invention". That raises the Happycap of every city by +1 right away, no Carnival or nothing to build, and I think evn gives a +10% bonus. It's hard to raise the Happycap in the opening game, so this turns out to be a pretty cheap and useful 'invention'. It's well worth turning off the R&D for awhile every so often. The overall usefullness is map-dependant, but it's certainly useful.

The Lunan, OTOH, I think will prove to have no real special advantage in the opening game. In the opening game, every civ needs to develop on land. Their sea advantages don't really kick in until the midgame, when sea-going techs are known and Lighthouses built. Until then they make much the same choices and harvest the same rewards as your vanilla FfH civ. (As if 'vanilla' really applies to anything in FfH. )

So I think we might find the Khazad and Barbarian civs might join the Ljo as fast-starters. But the former two also have mechanisms that act to ****** early development in some manner. Barbarians suffer a major loss of production, and they start with no known techs whatsoever. The Dwarven Vault allows for larger cities sooner, but it also results in fewer overall cities.

I don't think the Ljosalfar suffer from any similar constraint. But ask me again tomorrow, after I run my last test.

 

[Sureshot]

ya ya, everyone is overpowered, thats the point, and its fun, if you want to fix the elves, play vanilla, there they're called Arabia and their leader is Saladin, and i think they have 1 unique unit, and they're an even match to every other civ in every way.


a useful thread about elves would be ways the AI could utilize its own power so they can defeat the elves easily. i know i have no trouble using any civ to overpower the elves (who don't have the best economies, but i guess pretending they do somehow serves a purpose).