random thoughts

[QES]

@Sureshot
THere was once talk about forcing catapults to use roads to get through certain terrain. Places like woods and jungle and tundra would be inaccessable to catapults and other contraptions without roads. Would you see this as a fair means of mitigating what you said? Also, since its across the board, no one is really "punished" out of hand, correct?
-Qes

 

[Sareln]

we're talking two tiles, sorry for the inconvenience lol

a problem with trials is also the land given, Lanun with no ocean or lakes around will suffer, and Ljosalfar without expansive land forests will do horribly as well.

also, im pretty sure that its base 2 for lakes, and base 1 for ocean, with +1 for Lanun and +1 for lighthouses

Yeah you're right.

With the lanun, I tend to use the super-settler to make a beeline for the coast.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Why don't you folks just start up a multiplayer game and get this question answered once and for all?

Probably because it wouldn't settle it. First, too many random factors. Second, multiplayer is the lesser facet of FfH, and Civ IV in general. I fully expect the elves to not do as well in a multiplayer game both because humans know their strengths and can act accordingly, and because the other players are much more likely to form unofficial pacts against the elves to counter their stronger economy.

i've listened to everything you had to say, and you ignored new facts and rehashed old ideas based on terrain which are invalid. whats worse is you seek to reverse progress in favour of a crosswide balance thats been stated to not be the intention of the mod makers (civs are to be balanced overall, not in subcategories), while at the same time professing a desire to further power up the khazad who are the greatest producers of all.

How are ideas based on terrain invalid? I really don't think it's too far out there to expect that a city will have a few grassland tiles and a few plains or grassland/hills tiles in its fat cross. And while the developers certainly want a crosswise balance, the elves' features are the opposite of this. They excell in all areas with the single exception of siege weaponry. They have insane synergy with a particular strategy (the Fellowship), and, left more or less to themselves, they dominate in a single player game. Certainly the Khazad are the greatest producers, but they also face huge penalties in the form of no tier-3 or tier-4 arcane spellcasters and large penalties for expanding. This is what the elves lack.

i didnt realize lakes, that are also highly unpillageable (by that i mean not pillageable) and requring no improvements was somehow conditional. oh, and its 6 and 6 , pay attention. and if you get a lighthouse its 8 and 6 . but thanks for coming out. (Edit: I see this has already been corrected)

You're right in a way, Sureshot. I miscalculated. With lighthouses (not a certainty for newly made cities), one of the Lanun's leaders can get three , three from a single coastal tile. Working those tiles will produce two surplus , not four, and six . Combine this with the fact that most coastal cities have to deal with some oceans (three , one with a lighthouse), not to mention the fact that a hostile naval unit must merely be within a tile of a water tile to make it unworkable, and the Lanun don't seem so mighty. Especially not compared to the four eight that the Ljosalfar have no trouble getting.

 

[QES]

Can i suggest that Chand~ and Sureshot get a thread called "A room" started?
-Qes

 

[Civkid1991]

are you insinuating something qes?

 

[Sureshot]

it already exists, its called tree-bashing or some sort, and i left it lol

 

[QES]

All i know, is that every time i watch animae, its the woman and the guy that FIGHT THE MOST that wind up hooking up in the end. Its a law of Animae, and it may or may not carry weight here. Who knows?

Besides, the Sureshot Chand~ battle hath spilled over everything. I doubt a thread would contain it.

I admit, I get invovled now and then on the side of the tree huggers. But considering how much debate there is, it convinces me that in general its fairly balanced. The catapult question (only in defensive messures) is one that may need answering. But giving the elves catapults need not be the answer.

-Qes

Edit: It would appear that my insinuation was lost on everyone but civkid.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Perhaps "an arena" would be more like it.

 

[Sureshot]

@Sureshot
THere was once talk about forcing catapults to use roads to get through certain terrain. Places like woods and jungle and tundra would be inaccessable to catapults and other contraptions without roads. Would you see this as a fair means of mitigating what you said? Also, since its across the board, no one is really "punished" out of hand, correct?
-Qes

i think the current situation is well balanced, and catapults not being able to enter forests would make Leaves in general way too powerful (personally i dont build roads in my areas except for resources, because of raiders trait).

elves have a ton of negatives and a ton of positives, i hope that trend continues for them and every other civ despite the bashing some people are fond of. elves would get their butt kicked in multiplayer, hopefully the AI will learn how to manage them as well (if you argue that needs to be worked on, you won't get any argument from me).

 

[QES]

@ Sureshot
You consider them balanced, but would never expect to see them in multiplayer play. How can this mean they're truly balanced? Or is balance only intended for single player play (which is understandable)?
-Qes

 

[Civkid1991]

@ QES
Gosh... seems like its time for a lesson in speaking (or should i say spelling). Its spelled anime... i japanese Anime is the japanese word (katakana word) for animation. The basicly stole it from the english language and made it there own. the katakana for anime is:アニメ. So there will be no more mistakes in the future
Edit: see sig for further lesson in japanese

 

[QES]

@Civkid
.......Animae and Anime are essentially the same things, except the AE produces the [ay] sound more distinctly. It used to be a letter, once upon a time. It is similar to the difference in Color and Colour. If i say Colour will you correct me? There may be some brits on your butt if you do ;P.
-Qes

 

[Civkid1991]

yea like you said... Colour is british english. Color is american (and everone else?) english. Anime is japanese and if you what to say (spell) animae then that would be like english japanese.

 

[Sureshot]

most english speaking countries belong to the british commonwealth and generally use the british versions.

 

[Civkid1991]

Well i guess its safe for me to say its british english and american english

 

[Sureshot]

@ Sureshot
You consider them balanced, but would never expect to see them in multiplayer play. How can this mean they're truly balanced? Or is balance only intended for single player play (which is understandable)?
-Qes

in multiplayer other players would be aware of the fragility of the elves early on and the immense benefits to be gained from gaining elven slaves. if you're going to attack someone, who do you attack? the one with weaker city defense and an inability to build siege engines is where id be looking, as its easier to take and less fear of reprisal and the benefit of making your civ have all their benefits without any of their negatives once you take a city.

in general id say they're balanced for single player and multiplayer, but that the AI just doesn't know the value of killing elves yet (on deity aggressive ai's they still are like kittens).

 

[QES]

@Sureshot
Or bastardised versions of british english.

@Civkid
Animae is Anime. Yes the Japanese ripped american english to produce the word, but the japanese do this alot and come up with some very bizzare spellings and word combinations. It hurts nothing to say "animae" and it still means the same thing. There is in fact no "proper" spelling of the term. Not unless were going to also argue on the insistance of grammar construction.
-Qes

 

[QES]

in multiplayer other players would be aware of the fragility of the elves early on and the immense benefits to be gained from gaining elven slaves. if you're going to attack someone, who do you attack? the one with weaker city defense and an inability to build siege engines is where id be looking, as its easier to take and less fear of reprisal and the benefit of making your civ have all their benefits without any of their negatives once you take a city.

in general id say they're balanced for single player and multiplayer, but that the AI just doesn't know the value of killing elves yet (on deity aggressive ai's they still are like kittens).

Is the solution to remove the elven worker all together, and instead give elves buildings (built in cities) that provide bonuses that normally the improvements would?
-Qes

EDIT: Considering that Elves generally want to preserve nature (even outside of leaves religion), and that development of the land is not necessarily a good thing.

 

[Sureshot]

no, i really think its good the way it is. maybe adding a diplomatic modifier "you're elves and we hate you" -10 would be a better solution lmao

 

[Civkid1991]

@Civkid
Animae is Anime. Yes the Japanese ripped american english to produce the word, but the japanese do this alot and come up with some very bizzare spellings and word combinations. It hurts nothing to say "animae" and it still means the same thing. There is in fact no "proper" spelling of the term. Not unless were going to also argue on the insistance of grammar construction.
-Qes

well i am studying japanese so i dont know how long i could argue the point...