MORE BREAKING NEWS: The Kael Gang Goes Down!

[Sarisin]

It's not his choice. It's the AI controlled civs and autorazing 1 pop cities that is the problem. Am I correct Sarisin?

Exactly!

Even if I raze a barb city, I use the Sanctify spell to negate that razing. The counter is really unaffected.

However, AI civs almost always raze barb cities and never use Sanctify.

Also, as stated, many of the barb cities are pop 1 and you must raze.

 

[Sarisin]

This is all pretty standard stuff, I dont know why you would be seeing barbarian city pops like you are. I have never seen it, but I never play marathon speed games either.

Looking through the gamespeed files I did notice that we set the barbarian spawn rate to 300 (1/3 as slow as the normal game) where the default is 400 (1/4 as slow) for the marathon game speed. All the rest are as normal. I will switch that back to the default of 400 in the next patch and see if that helps.

ps. I got a good laugh from the first post, very funny

Thank you sir! I shall call off those nasty Taskmasters and Succubi...although you probably are enjoying the latter.

I think probably less than 10% of FFH2 players play at the Marathon speed. I mostly use Epic because IMO Marathon is unplayable (with raging barbs, huge map, default number of civs).

Let's see what happens with the patch. I will be sure to let you know in my, own, fashion.

 

[wilboman]

Thank you sir! I shall call off those nasty Taskmasters and Succubi...although you probably are enjoying the latter.

Well, you know, when the Succubi look like Rosie O'Donnell...

 

[vorshlumpf]

I think probably less than 10% of FFH2 players play at the Marathon speed. I mostly use Epic because IMO Marathon is unplayable (with raging barbs, huge map, default number of civs).

It's interesting how we've had such different experiences with Marathon games. However, I will concede to your opinion for now because I haven't had much time for gaming lately.

 

[Sarisin]

It's interesting how we've had such different experiences with Marathon games. However, I will concede to your opinion for now because I haven't had much time for gaming lately.

V, I think the key lies in the number of civs we each play with in our game. You play with 16, and I use the default total of 10.

I tried your method, as I mentioned, and found the raging barbs and their cities not to be an issue. The extra civs tended to fill up even the huge map rather quickly in my game and pushed the barbs and animals off the map. There was no place for their cities to spring up.

I know having the time is a problem, but when you do have some free time, try using the default number of civs in your next Marathon game and see what happens.

I just downloaded the 'c' patch. I will abandon my ongoing game (no choice ) and try a Marathon game to see how it goes.

 

[vorshlumpf]

I tried your method, as I mentioned, and found the raging barbs and their cities not to be an issue. The extra civs tended to fill up even the huge map rather quickly in my game and pushed the barbs and animals off the map. There was no place for their cities to spring up.

Well, in my last game, only about 60% of the land was settled around the time the horsemen started to appear. That left plenty of land (especially since it was a huge highlands map) for barbs.

I know having the time is a problem, but when you do have some free time, try using the default number of civs in your next Marathon game and see what happens.

Maybe I'll have time to try that out this weekend.

 

[Sarisin]

Well, here's an update to test the barb city spawning in my first .23c game:

I am playing Einon Logos on Marathon, huge fantasy realm map, raging barbs/aggAI, Monarch. I started with the default civs: mine plus 9. But, it is one of THOSE games

Three civs, Bannor, Kuriotates, and Sheaim, were taken out by the barbs before yr. 175.

This is the first game I can remember when Acheron spawned before Orthus. Acheron showed up around yr. 180 and Orthus yr. 250.

Just to give you an idea of what the raging barbs have been like: I have 11 units (8 warriors and 3 hunters) maxed out with 100 XP. I'm sure most would have 200 if it was allowed.

I have not been able to venture out to build a 3rd city. Really, no let-up since the barbs started coming and I have seen a half dozen or so double digit stacks of orc spearmen and goblins with an occasional skeleton in there. Not many animals on the map now.

I opened up the World Builder to count the number of barb cities. There are 'only' 10. One of these is Acheron's and 2 are cities that were captured by the barbs when ai civs were destroyed. So, I think the spawning rate has slowed down.

Also, it is the yr. 325 and the Armageddon Counter is at 14. I think this is good considering 2 civs that went down were Good. Also, with the intense pounding from the barbs, it seems no one is venturing out to raze barb cities.

So, based on this game, it appears the Marathon problems of barb cities popping up too much is better.

Now, if it only didn't take you 100+ turns to found a religion.

 

[BeefontheBone]

Heh - on the other extreme, I just had Acheron appear on turn 465 of an Epic game Fractal map came up with smallish islands, leaving the barbs very little space to spawn in (and pretty much making the Raging Barbs option irrelevant).

 

[Sarisin]

I surrender! I am convinced that .23 is unplayable (with my variables anyway) at Marathon speed.

It is amazing what a difference 100 turns can make even in a Marathon game. In my last post I said things looked a lot better with the 'c' patch.

However, when Varn Gosam was wiped out leaving only 7 civs, including mine, it left a lot of open space on the huge map and the barb settling crew went into hyperdrive.

By turn 400, there were 18 barb cities...more than the total of the 7 civs!!!

The counter had already made it up to 37 with Blight just around the corner.

Again, it seems to be the counter is moving mainly because (a) AI civs are getting wiped out (they still try to expand like crazy with the ole one Warrior defense!) and (b) the AI (and me!) taking out barb cities.

So, I give up. I promise to be a good boy and play only Epic games from now on and to never send Bannor Enforcers after Kael.

 

[vorshlumpf]

Sarasin, I took your challenge (playing with the default number of civs), and I'm just not getting the same result. Besides the demise of many civs, I haven't seen anything harder than I've seen before. In fact, I've had many harder games than this, and I'm even playing on a harder level than I normally do.

Game Set-Up:
Map = Lakes
Size = Huge
Sea Level = High
Speed = Marathon
Difficulty = Emperor
Number of civs = 10 (default)
Extras = City flipping after conquest, Raging Barbs, Aggressive AI, No Tech Trading

Summary:
172 - Acheron is built
194 - Sheaim destroyed
210 - AC starts to grow
226 - Orthus appears
279 - Doviello destroyed
305 - Lanun destroyed
376 - Bannor destroyed
392 - AC reaches 10
438 - Current turn, AC is 12

Random notes:
- I haven't seen a lot of barb cities. Without going to the world builder, I'd have to guess that there are around 9-12 in the world. Considering how much empty space there is, that isn't much.
- I really like how the wilderness is now much harder to explore. This is thanks to the increased number of animals, the introduction of packs/prides, and the increase in every unit's strength.
- I'm only a tiger away from the Grand Menagerie! What are the chances of me finding one? (I think slim)
- I saw the biggest stacks of barbs I've ever seen in this game. About 6-9 units in 2 stacks at one time.
- The Khazad, of all civs, are running away with the game. They have the only religion and are super-teched compared to me.

Sarasin, I'm not sure what to say. If we want to do further comparisons, perhaps we can play the same game (from turn 1)? However, using only the default number of civs doesn't really turn my crank. The reason I always max out is for the extra variety it provides, and reduces the chances of one civ taking off. Playing with only 10 in a marathon game, which is a huge commitment, seems like... I'm dating someone I don't really like

 

[Sarisin]

Sarasin, I took your challenge (playing with the default number of civs), and I'm just not getting the same result. Besides the demise of many civs, I haven't seen anything harder than I've seen before. In fact, I've had many harder games than this, and I'm even playing on a harder level than I normally do.

Sarasin, I'm not sure what to say. If we want to do further comparisons, perhaps we can play the same game (from turn 1)? However, using only the default number of civs doesn't really turn my crank. The reason I always max out is for the extra variety it provides, and reduces the chances of one civ taking off. Playing with only 10 in a marathon game, which is a huge commitment, seems like... I'm dating someone I don't really like

hahaha, I like your last comment, Niilo!

I appreciate you taking the time to play a game and it does look very similar to the variables I select. While it's true games can vary wildly with each go, I just have found there is a pattern in virtually all the Marathon games I play.

However, instead of whining and going CSI with my stats, etc. I've decided to just stay with the Epic speed games. I really don't think FFH2 is designed for the slow Marathon speed. The poll I put up tells me that most other players agree.

But, continue to enjoy those loooong games, my friend, and continue to let us know how you are doing.

 

[wilboman]

Marathon isn't really a very well-balanced speed even in Vanilla, I'm not surprised it gives odd results in FfH...

 

[Grey Fox]

Marathon isn't really a very well-balanced speed even in Vanilla, I'm not surprised it gives odd results in FfH...

I don't think the Tech-Tree is well-paced in Vanilla on any of the speeds...

FfH2 does a much better job at that.

 

[marioflag]

Marathon isn't really a very well-balanced speed even in Vanilla, I'm not surprised it gives odd results in FfH...

The only big problem with FfH2 and Marathon games is experience which IMO should be scaled down to game speed.Heroes on Marathon speed becomes really OP because it's not that hard to get an hero with more than 400-500 XP, which makes them nearly invincible if escorted by other units particularly with medic promotion.AoI actually seemed to me more balanced under this point of view because experience was slower to get so i had to use my hero more carefully.The slower pace on FfH2 makes game more balanced than in Vanilla though, units gets obsoleted after more time so you have more time to play with those toys.

 

[vorshlumpf]

In BtS there is an option to set minimum XP won from a battle to 0 (instead of the current default of 1). I'll be petitioning Kael to introduce this as the new default in FfH II along with no limits to XP for barb units.

(what setting the min XP to 0 does is it prevents you from 'farming' XP from lesser units. The more powerful your unit gets, the more powerful your enemies need to be in order to get any XP from them)

 

[marioflag]

In BtS there is an option to set minimum XP won from a battle to 0 (instead of the current default of 1). I'll be petitioning Kael to introduce this as the new default in FfH II along with no limits to XP for barb units.

(what setting the min XP to 0 does is it prevents you from 'farming' XP from lesser units. The more powerful your unit gets, the more powerful your enemies need to be in order to get any XP from them)

Having it even as a game option would really help game balance on Marathon.IMO the best balanced option is that from Vanilla game, it makes combat so much harder.

 

[woodelf]

Unrelated to the current discussion, but for a minute I thought I was actually dead:

woodelf expires

Sadly, that is my real name...

 

[BenTheMort]

Unrelated to the current discussion, but for a minute I thought I was actually dead:

woodelf expires

Sadly, that is my real name...

Your name is Tom Snyder? Well thats just crazy