Armageddon - why would I WANT to build this?

[Iblis]

Maybe I've missed something, but is there some benefit to building armageddon that I'm not aware of? It kills 60% of the world's units and half of all the world's population (including yours) but on the plus side it lets you build the mithril golem and some other uber units. Well whoop de doo .

Personally, I don't think this is a great trade-off. Can someone enlighten me?

Ibs

 

[Xanikk999]

Maybe I've missed something, but is there some benefit to building armageddon that I'm not aware of? It kills 60% of the world's units and half of all the world's population (including yours) but on the plus side it lets you build the mithril golem and some other uber units. Well whoop de doo .

Personally, I don't think this is a great trade-off. Can someone enlighten me?

Ibs

I agree with you. I would never build this.

But then again i never use nukes in vanilla because i dont want the world to turn into a desert.

 

[QES]

Maybe I've missed something, but is there some benefit to building armageddon that I'm not aware of? It kills 60% of the world's units and half of all the world's population (including yours) but on the plus side it lets you build the mithril golem and some other uber units. Well whoop de doo .

Personally, I don't think this is a great trade-off. Can someone enlighten me?

Ibs

YOu build it if you're losing. Specifically, if you build it in like, 3rd or 4th place, everyone equivilantly gets crapped on. But that hurts MORE if your in the lead. Because you've higher populations, more units, etc. So while % wise its actually balanced, the "enemies" lose more in terms of raw material. If you combine this with an excecuted attack (or better yet, summons from your surviving mages) you can actually gain an upper hand against people who've bested you thus far.
I've never used it. BUt that is the theory of its operation as I understand it.
-Qes

 

[Silverkiss]

Or if you want to just f**k the entire world.

 

[Xanikk999]

Does the AI ever build it thinking its a good thing because its a "wonder"?

 

[Grey Fox]

Most people probably play on a difficulty where they almost always get in the lead, but if you are not in the lead, maybe you are in the middle or even last in score and territory it is a viable strategy.

It can also be good to do it before a war, if you save building your good units until after its completed.

 

[Kael]

Maybe I've missed something, but is there some benefit to building armageddon that I'm not aware of? It kills 60% of the world's units and half of all the world's population (including yours) but on the plus side it lets you build the mithril golem and some other uber units. Well whoop de doo .

Personally, I don't think this is a great trade-off. Can someone enlighten me?

Ibs

Yeap, just got to be clever. It kills 60% of the worlds living units. Meaning it won't effect the Luchuirps golem army, or a civilization that relies strongly on undead and demons. Some players have noticed that if they do "Blood of the Phoenix" first their units that are effected by Apocalypse will be reborn in their capital instead of being killed, giving them a significant advantage.

As it has been mentioned it is an equalizing factor hitting strong players harder than weak ones. And can be swishy enough to allow for some major turnovers after it hits (especially if you have undead hordes lined up on your opponents borders waiting to see if any of his cities are left exposed).

 

[thealien_83]

Yeap, just got to be clever. It kills 60% of the worlds living units.

Sneaky! Very, very sneaky!

 

[Quetz]

I can't really see its as an "equalizer" given how long it takes to build. No weaker civ is going to be able to afford waiting 200 turns for it.

But it is quite nice for Luchiurp/Death civs (do Calabim get Death mana? weird if not..)

 

[Silverkiss]

They dont because death mana incurs a penalty in diplomacy

 

[Grey Fox]

But it is quite nice for Luchiurp/Death civs (do Calabim get Death mana? weird if not..)

They dont get death magic, but the Vampires get death automatically.

 

[Kael]

do Calabim get Death mana? weird if not..

They don't, why is that weird?

 

[Xanikk999]

They don't, why is that weird?

Calabim are vampires and kill thier own citizens to survive. Makes sense to me.

 

[Silverkiss]

Well, in FfH II Vampires aren´t undead, they are living beings that suck life out of people to extend their own...

 

[Xanikk999]

Well, in FfH II Vampires aren´t undead, they are living beings that suck life out of people to extend their own...

Isnt that fitting enough for death mana?

IMO to extend thier life is necromancy so it should be associated with death mana.

 

[Silverkiss]

They dont because death mana incurs a penalty in diplomacy

And Kael doesn´t want any civ (besides Infernal) to start with a penalty.

...

 

[Sureshot]

id want svartalfar to have it, diplo penalties arent all that bad, and other evil civs dont care.. maybe a positive for other evil civs, then it would help polarize the game more (more polarization is needed, barely any good vs evil wars going on)

 

[SKILORD]

I agree with Sureshot.

Heck, I would make it so that only Good Civs cared if you were using Death mana because even though vampires aren't undead it makes a heck of a lot of sense for them to have it and neutral civs aren't lazy good civs, they're neutral, why should they care? Naughty civs should have it as a + in diplo and then you only really have problems with it if you spawn surrounded by good civs, and even then I would just adhere to my rush a religion and try to spread it so other people like me strategy (which could well end up fixing their alignment) and frankly if even I posess the strategic mind to deal with it then I'd have to assume that anyone could do it.

And there just isn't enough good/evil conflict in my average game unless I start it.

 

[Dashwood]

That would be a nice addition. As it stands, I've noticed with Amurites that not everybody gives me flak for my Death Mana Soul Forge (that I sacrifice hidden nationality Tigers to, courtesy of my open borders trigger-happy neighbours), but it would be much better if some civs saw Death Mana as a bonus.

In another post it was mentioned that the Good Civs tend to get along better and, thus, traded their technologies more freely amongst one another. The Death/Entropy mana bonus between Evil Civs might not be enough to let them get along, but it would certainly help keep them from fighting one another constantly and maybe turn their attentions to the good guys who, by then, would be -8 furious! Can we say 'Bannor Crusade'?

The only trouble, I think, would be the flavour to the Amurite civilization. Evil civilizations are supposed to have trouble with Amurites for regulating Death and Entropy magics, in particular the Sheaim. Perhaps an equal modifier for the Amurites that would pop up with the Death Mana bonus that would effectively nullify it:

+4 You use Death Magic,
-4 You place sanctions on your necromancers! >:O
+4 You use Entropy Magic,
-4 You place sanctions on your uhm... entropic mages... >_>

or a simple -4 you regulate Death Magic,

But yes, need much more Good vs. Evil slaughterhousing.

 

[Sureshot]

lil confused about your talk about amurites.. they're neutral, and should dislike people using death magick same as other neutrals, though maybe worse since they dont like it.. maybe give them an equivalent to the goods hate for death users