Mountain yields

[PotatoOverdose]

There exist a large quantity of reasons in Lore why the Khazad shouldn't have mountain yields. Monkeyfinger made a good post a while back in another thread about how the leaders of the Khazad realized that spending their entire lives in the Underholme, hiding from the outside world, had effectively castrated the spirit of the dwarves. If you read up on the dwarves in FFH, the whole point of the Khazad is to plunder the surface world, not crawl back into their mountains. Now, if we had an underholme civ, mountain yields might make sense. Then again, the underholme would want nothing to do with the surface world in the first place. These aren't the dwarves of D&D, warcraft, or warhammer IIRC. These are dwarves set on reconquering the part of the world of men and elves that was once theirs.

 

[the_fish]

Then why do the Khazad/RoK have so much to do with mines/mining?

As I interpret it, the lore justifies why the dwarves don't spend all their time underground, but they haven't forsaken it entirely. The game backs this up.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

The Khazad did not come to the surface because dwelling in the Underhome "castrated their spirit," they did so because their tunnels were becoming cramped and they were low on resources (and because their new king feels guilty over having killed his kin and so has chosen to exile himself as punishment). Dwarves aren't about plunder either, but about hard work. Plundering is clearly part of the spheres of Tali and/or Mammon, who are the the Dwarves seen as perhaps the most evil of the gods (although Tali is usually considered neutral and fairly good natured, he is Kilmorph's nemesis).


It is the Luchuirp that are intent on reclaiming their part of the surface world, not the Khazad. However, even they have decided that leaving their caves so much as to forget how to dig again is a very bad idea.

 

[Honor]

Can I jump in here?

It would improve gameplay for the 'role-play'-type player, by making the world seem more consistent (this is defining 'gameplay' to be the general game-playing experience). For a 'strategic'-type player, it's just another tweaked setting, which I concede makes the game marginally more complex.

Exactly. I am an RP-oriented player. I am beginning to feel this whole debate is between strategists and RPers. Strategists despise tweaks like these because they are afraid their hard-learned strategies may suddenly become obsolete

Edit: Present company excluded of course

 

[Luckmann]

[...]
It is the Luchuirp that are intent on reclaiming their part of the surface world, not the Khazad. However, even they have decided that leaving their caves so much as to forget how to dig again is a very bad idea.

Which is why the Luchiurp should get +1, while the Khazad should get +2!

 

[Grey Fox]

Exactly. I am an RP-oriented player. I am beginning to feel this whole debate is between strategists and RPers. Strategists despise tweaks like these because they are afraid their hard-learned strategies may suddenly become obsolete

Not really, I don't care about my hard-learned strategies. I'm not on that part of the spectrum. I actually love trying to think up new strategies, or try other peoples wacky strategies,etc.
What I do care about is game design, game play, and one of my favorite parts of game design, balance.

I understand why many would like this in the game, but the reasons for not implementing this outweighs it in my book.

 

[Jules.lt]

I understand why many would like this in the game, but the reasons for not implementing this outweighs it in my book.

Yet the only reason relevant to yield that you gave is "When one object is worth less, the other objects are worth more".

Which actually goes our side since we propose making peak yields available only to 2 civs and at a certain tech -> valuable.

I'll try to dig for more reasons that you gave, but I don't remember any.

Edit:

here's one:

some tiles need to be useless.

I still don't understand why...


and another:

we already have mountain yields, they are on the Hills

 

[Jet]

The Dwarf civs are strong enough already.

 

[Jules.lt]

- They're not top-tier
- The AI can't handle them in their natural habitat (hills and peaks)
- We don't propose giving them anything overpowered
- FFH's balancing is based on making everything overpowered in its own way

Edit: as strange as it may look, I'm not dead set on giving dwarves yields on peaks
It's the uncompromising "No Way" of some that set me off.

 

[Grey Fox]

- FFH's balancing is based on making everything overpowered in its own way

That's not true. It's somewhat like this in some cases. But most things that are powerful have one or more counters.

I'm not dead set on "No Way", but I am more against it than I am for it.
Mostly I felt someone needed to stand up against all the "That's cool, lets add it"-attitude.

 

[Jet]

Mostly I felt someone needed to stand up against all the "That's cool, lets add it"-attitude.

You are the hand of justice.

 

[Luckmann]

That's not true. It's somewhat like this in some cases. But most things that are powerful have one or more counters.

I'm not dead set on "No Way", but I am more against it than I am for it.
Mostly I felt someone needed to stand up against all the "That's cool, lets add it"-attitude.

I'm standing up for the "That's cool, so why not?"-attitude, then.

I'm the first one to oppose the Rule of Cool, but if something lore-fitting and flavourfull can be incorporated without major unbalance, I have to keep asking myself - why not? I just don't think that the reasonings presented against the idea so far outweights the added flavour.

 

[H&K]

How about, it gives NO yeild, BUT when mined gives dwalf players A minerial resource each/some % of the time. So Gems, Silver, Gold, Mitherial etc.

Also, (I know its said the AI would get confused but), a mined mountain is Passable to dwalfs at some large value.

ALSO, dont goblins "Dig deep into the roots of Mountains"

 

[the_fish]

I'm not dead set on "No Way", but I am more against it than I am for it.
Mostly I felt someone needed to stand up against all the "That's cool, lets add it"-attitude.

What the...so if a well-thought-out, balanced idea is popular, you'd oppose it regardless?

"That's cool, lets add it" isn't an indicator of whether the idea is good for the game or not. Popular ideas can be terrible, and initially unpopular ideas can turn out to have lasting benefits. The worth of the idea is decided through at first reasoned debate and ultimately playtesting.

I see where you're coming from - lots of ideas get suggested all the time, and most of them wouldn't work well but are jumped on by flavour groupies anyway. But you shouldn't automatically group these type of suggestions under 'fail'.

-----

This idea, alongside other civ/yield tweaks, is easy to balance, easy to understand (both players&AI), is fun, and adds additional flavour. The issue of terrain contrast has already been addressed, and the lore appears to be in support of it.

Assuming it can be easily implemented, what exactly is wrong with the idea?

(
for reference, the three main ideas I can see so far are:

• Fixed x output
• 1, after n turns worked gains mine (+2 )
• 1, gains additional from techs

)

 

[PotatoOverdose]

Then why do the Khazad/RoK have so much to do with mines/mining?

As I interpret it, the lore justifies why the dwarves don't spend all their time underground, but they haven't forsaken it entirely. The game backs this up.

Runes of Kilmorph believes in worshipping the earth or some deity/set of philosophies related to the earth which leads to mining and what have you. The Khazad. RoK lore has a lot to do with mines and resources of the earth. The fact that their exists a good synergy between the Khazad and RoK proves nothing. There exists an even better synergy between the Clan and RoK. Does it therefore follow that the Clan should get mountain yields?

Since this argument is about lore, let us look at Khazad (not RoK, it is a completely separate entity) lore. Nowhere in Khazad lore does it state that they mine or work in the mountains. What Khazad lore does make clear is that they have been effectively exiled from the surface for trying to explore it in the first place. Various excerpts go on to depict a Khazad society that is fighting to survive and thrive off of the riches of the surface, not the riches buried deep underground.

 

[Grey Fox]

What the...so if a well-thought-out, balanced idea is popular, you'd oppose it regardless?

No, I was gonna add "not well-thought-out" but I didn't want to offend anyone.
Read my comments below to get a bit more arguments from me.

Ok after chatting some in #erebus here are some additional arguments against it.

A citizen specialists gives +1 hammer. So for it to be actually worth it, the peaks would have to give +2 Hammers, that's the same as an Engineer can give, and they are rare most of the game. (Not counting the GPP). And that sounds like too much to me. (And if you go to 3 it's starting to be too much like a hill)

And they can't be pillaged/blocked by most units. Which is really powerful.

 

[Honor]

How about, it gives NO yeild, BUT when mined gives dwalf players A minerial resource each/some % of the time. So Gems, Silver, Gold, Mitherial etc.

Also, (I know its said the AI would get confused but), a mined mountain is Passable to dwalfs at some large value.

ALSO, dont goblins "Dig deep into the roots of Mountains"

Making peaks passable for only two races would create a plethora of balance issues, so I disagree. Being able to turn them into hills on the other hand (Sokka's Dozer ) not so much.

Peaks should give yields to dwarves, but no mine-building on top of them.

 

[Luckmann]

[...]
Peaks should give yields to dwarves, but no mine-building on top of them.

Again, we are in agreeance. Absolutely no peak improvements or movement. Just +1 for Luchiurp, +2 for Khazad, and +1 for anyone with Arete.

And, of course, Earth 3 - Sokka's Dozer.

 

[Honor]

No, I was gonna add "not well-thought-out" but I didn't want to offend anyone.
Read my comments below to get a bit more arguments from me.

Ok after chatting some in #erebus here are some additional arguments against it.

A citizen specialists gives +1 hammer. So for it to be actually worth it, the peaks would have to give +2 Hammers, that's the same as an Engineer can give, and they are rare most of the game. (Not counting the GPP). And that sounds like too much to me. (And if you go to 3 it's starting to be too much like a hill)

And they can't be pillaged/blocked by most units. Which is really powerful.

There is nothing powerful about it, because a dwarf city with lots of mountains would still need to be able to work the tiles. If the city is bordering a wall of mountains it will not be able to grow enough to make use of that production anyway. A normal city usually gets 1-3 peaks in its cross, and that's all the extra hammers the dwarves will get. Elven cities still beat dwarves in terms of productivity, which is silly imo. Dwarves are supposed to be the industrial race.

They can't be pillaged/blocked unless you get Sokka's Dozer, which comes bundled with the yields (I *wish* )

 

[Giga-Gigan]

edit: at PotatoOverdose

It has been said before that that the matron angel of the dwarves is Kilmorph, the very fact that they are dwarves instead of humans is testament to that. While it is true that they can adopt any religion that is besides the point, Kilmorph and dwarves are invariably mixed and trying to look at each of them individually without accounting for the deep connections between the two will invariably lead incomplete view of dwarfish culture.
I will not have it!