• Dear forum visitor,

    It looks as though you have not registered for a forum account, or are not signed in. In order to participate in current discussions or create new threads, you will need to register for a forum account by clicking on the link below.

    Click here to register for a forum account!

    If you already have a forum account, you can simply click on the 'Log in' button at the top right of your forum screen.

    Your Elvenar Team

Should tournaments be based on squad size?

DeletedUser9601

Guest
Even if we were able to go back and make the choice again, it favours non-fighting players either way. The increased difficulty on the world map has no effect on them, so the only choice is skipping all possible techs making tournaments 60% cheaper.

I just started making my second city, as a "fighting" city, with battle-focused AWs and ignoring Squad Size for as long as possible. I'm interested to see how the game feels when you try to progress mainly through tournament rewards, and somewhat ignore other aspects of the game.
 

Sir Squirrel

Artist EXTRAORDINAIRE and Buddy Fan Club member
I agree Mykan, there is no info on it anywhere and is very deceiving. Like you say, researching SS upgrades really shouldn't make one thing harder and another easier, at least not without some info explaining it, and those of us that have been researching all the tecs all along are beat. I don't think we should be penalized for researching every tec as it cost more KP to do that, so it shouldn't cost us twice. Or at least the difference in tourney difficulty shouldn't be as much as it is now for those that research every SS tec.
 
Last edited:

Ashrem

Oh Wise One
researching SS upgrades really shouldn't make one thing harder and another easier
Except isn't that what life is like? You can pick a car that goes fast, or one that is fuel efficient, food that is fast, or food that is nutritious or food that is cheap. Entering a trade early (and having a few extra years of earning at the start of your career), or going to university and having a higher cap on your earnings. For almost everything, humans do, we have to look for the balance that works best for us. The choice isn't only between all optional SS upgrades or none, it's possible to take some but not all. As long as there are ups and downs to either choice, it remains a choice. If there's is no downside to something, then everyone should be doing it and it ceases to be an option.
 

DeletedUser7370

Guest
@Ashrem I love the quote from Dominic in your signature; he is an awesome author and that is one of my all-time favorite books. However I think you got it a little wrong. I am certain he wrote: "71% of forum participants..." and you have ".71% of forum participants...". That is a very large difference. If it would help I can search for it in my copy.
 

SoggyShorts

Mathematician par Excellence
As long as there are ups and downs to either choice, it remains a choice.
For pure negotiators there is no downside to skipping all SS techs, just an upside that many don't even know about until it's too late.
I suppose you can say that not building troops is the choice for those players, but many would make that choice regardless as fighting just isn't their thing.
 

Ashrem

Oh Wise One
@Ashrem I love the quote from Dominic in your signature; he is an awesome author and that is one of my all-time favorite books. However I think you got it a little wrong. I am certain he wrote: "71% of forum participants..." and you have ".71% of forum participants...". That is a very large difference. If it would help I can search for it in my copy.
You could be right (My copy is incomplete), but I'd be surprised. I recall a passage in that chapter with some comments about how only the truly, exceptionally, small-minded will make the extra effort, while the majority of forum participants are either able to argue dispassionately, or are unwilling to stoop to personal attacks when thwarted. It could be that the .71% is incorrect, but I'd be afraid for the world if it was more than 2%.
For pure negotiators there is no downside to skipping all SS techs, just an upside that many don't even know about until it's too late.
I suppose you can say that not building troops is the choice for those players, but many would make that choice regardless as fighting just isn't their thing.
Regardless of why they make the choice, negotiating only in the provinces is a choice. It is not for you or I to claim that their choice is not a valid one, deserving of consideration.
 

SoggyShorts

Mathematician par Excellence
Regardless of why they make the choice, negotiating only in the provinces is a choice. It is not for you or I to claim that their choice is not a valid one, deserving of consideration.
Indeed, quite the opposite in fact. I think it might be the best choice since there is no limit to how much you can negotiate on the world map.
I think it's worth taking a look at whether skipping all SS techs is a far better option than going max military. If one is significantly better than the other, then that hurts the idea of choice.

60% cheaper tournaments and no limit on world map (after unlocking breeding grounds)
vs
Increased losses in tournament but Large SS size capable of clearing "hard" map provinces at lower cost.

Also worth noting is that there might be a lower cap on troop production than goods. Once you have max level barracks and needles, how does that compare to a similar city using the same space for goods?

Personally I'm doing OK with a hybrid where I've skipped most SS techs and can do both fairly well. Jack of all trades master of none sorta thing.
 

DeletedUser7370

Guest
Also worth noting is that there might be a lower cap on troop production than goods. Once you have max level barracks and needles, how does that compare to a similar city using the same space for goods?
When I ran the numbers for a single province in chapter 7 the supplies costs to produce negotiating goods and replacement troops for those lost in combat were equal. The difference was in the the production time to replace the usage. The per encounter numbers were: negotiating required 4.5 factory hours (1/2 of a 3 hour run in each tier) and combat required 1 barracks hour (L4 Needles and L19 barracks). If a person can't consistently do 3 hour runs on the factories and instead does 9/9/3 per day then it would work out to 10 encounters they can negotiate per day for each set of factories they have. Whereas keeping the barracks running has less time constraints and if able to run constantly would produce enough to handle 24 encounters per day.

I will drop the barracks production down to 20 encounters per day to cover heavier losses, missed time, and ease of comparison. I will also leave out all the culture and population buildings and roads during the space comparison. I would need 2 sets of factories to match the barracks production: T1 3x5=15, T2 4x4=16, T3 4x5=20; 51x2 (match production rates)=102 + Mountain Halls 3x8 = 126. Barracks 4x7=28, 5 Armories 5x5x5=125, Needles 3x5=15, Martial Monastery 4x5=20; total of 188. Space wise negotiating currently wins. I don't know how many orcs are needed as an per encounter later, but once they are required then the armories get counted on both sides possibly with scaling factors to even the production over time.

Now I will get the culture and population for those. Totals required for 1 set of the factories: 5858 population and 1495 culture; double that to match the replenishment rates and you got 11716 pop and 2990 culture. On the military side I don't feel adding all the values for the barracks from the wiki so I used the armory's pop/culture ratio and applied that to the ranking points to estimate the barracks: 6521 population and 14949 culture. If I then subtract out the culture from the MM: 12078 culture. Factory production when matched for time uses much more population.

Those numbers are based on province negotiation. The tournament is a bit different and someone would have to really track all the details for a few tournaments, but I will pop out just a few things that I have handy to look at right now. Catering province 10 round 2 averages a full 3 hour production from each tier per encounter and province 11 round 1 was nearly the same; that is double what I found for province negotiations which would mean adding another 102 squares of factories (total 204+24) and another 11716 population to exclusively cater in tournaments. Some early provinces are much lower but I haven't tried to full record all of it to calculate and a quick look at province 7 round 3 showed catering still using about 3/4ths of a 3 hour production from all tiers. On the military side province 10 round 2 had a tourney SS of 390 and province 11 round 1 had 430. Both of those should have average about 1 tourney squad for combat losses. My regular SS is 780 making the tourney losses at that point about 1/2 squad per encounter. That is the number I used in my province calculations because I aim to keep those at easy to low medium. Which means that for tournaments combat likely uses less space to produce the materials to finish equal numbers of encounters in an equal amount of time.

Equalizing for time is really the key to making a fair comparison of the 2 methods.
Personally I'm doing OK with a hybrid where I've skipped most SS techs and can do both fairly well. Jack of all trades master of none sorta thing.
I use the same strategy. I started skipping them in chapter 7 when the advanced scouts tech turned everything on the current ring to easy. If that doesn't happen at the start of a later chapter then I will grab one of the older optional techs to bring them to easy for the start of the chapter. I delay most of the conquering until the end of the chapter when I have all the mandatory SS techs.
 

DeletedUser9601

Guest
Does anyone worry about a world where Inno figures out this Squad Size Tech issue, and normalizes the algorithms such that everyone wants the optional techs? This raises an obvious problem that most of these optional techs require obsolete guest race goods.

In my main city, I've researched all optional techs mainly for this reason, though I suppose I could have saved up enough guest race goods? Though maybe not if I also wanted a guest race goods buffer for extra roads?
 

Mykan

Oh Wise One
As long as there are ups and downs to either choice, it remains a choice. If there's is no downside to something, then everyone should be doing it and it ceases to be an option.

As I see this as a strategy game that uses city building as its medium (not a city building game) I see no issue with this except that it is not clear you are making this choice. Then add to this that it was clear on the choice prior to the mechanic changin
g and that change in mechanic is huge. Its not like changing a building stats that you can delete and rebuild, it is changing something that you cannot undo ever.

Does anyone worry about a world where Inno figures out this Squad Size Tech issue, and normalizes the algorithms such that everyone wants the optional techs? This raises an obvious problem that most of these optional techs require obsolete guest race goods.

This doesn't worry me as a person choosing to not do this and then deleting the portal has made an informed choice. They also have the ability to stockpile the required goods before deleting the portal and still have the ability to build the portal and goods had they failed to do this. For me these are informed choices just like those people could spend the KP and not unlock the research or just leave them blank and use their KP somewhere else.

Of course if it does change there will be a huge outcry from people in such a situation.
 

Sir Squirrel

Artist EXTRAORDINAIRE and Buddy Fan Club member
Yeah my problem with it is I was already in S&D chapter and had been researching all the tecs when they changed it, so I really didn't have much choice. I can't go back and not research tecs that are already done. I could skip one now in halflings, but not sure how much that would help. Also the fact that there really isn't any info in game about the choice of researching the SS upgrades, most players would just think they have to research them.
 

DeletedUser7370

Guest
I see it as very well balanced for the province encounters. The tournaments have a compounding effect; making lower squad sizes valuable to a player that has access to greater building upgrades. The current design does not seem game breaking nor do I see it as something the developers must draw attention to. Even when there was not a difficulty indicator on province encounters, I do not see it as necessary for the developers to alert player to the fact that combat is easy and they can ignore some techs.

In fact given the rigid must research completely worthless techs (non-boosts) and unwanted techs (player doesn't want military) design I figure that some techs being optional is already a massive hint that players should consider carefully before getting them.

If the game was of a sandbox design on the researches then I might see a need for some change.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ashrem

Oh Wise One
The current design does not seem game breaking nor do I see it as something the developers must draw attention to.
Yup. I've played in games where we'd pray the devs didn't notice little things because they'd obsess about rinky-dink breaks while ignoring stuff that was driving players away. There have to be several dozen things more important than the balance between Squad Sizes, province fights and Tournaments. Like, say more than 75% of the cities being ghost towns.....
 

DeletedUser7370

Guest
Yup. I've played in games where we'd pray the devs didn't notice little things because they'd obsess about rinky-dink breaks while ignoring stuff that was driving players away. There have to be several dozen things more important than the balance between Squad Sizes, province fights and Tournaments. Like, say more than 75% of the cities being ghost towns.....
I sense a deep sarcasm in those statements. I already started a topic that is completely about this. I have never encountered a game with as high an attrition rate as this one. The scale of attrition clearly indicates a massive disconnect between player and developer desires. I can't be bothered to dig deeper; largely because the developers are not open and honest about their activities.
 

Ashrem

Oh Wise One
The scale of attrition clearly indicates a massive disconnect between player and developer desires.
I'm not so certain that isn't working as intended. There are industries where it is sound business practice to pay the absolute minimum the law will allow, because skill is not required and there is little premium on long-term employees. Fast food, some retail, etc. Like those, it's possible (I'm not saying certain) that Inno has decided High-turnover is a profitable path while they get to a certain point, or possibly even permanently. Few of the high-payers are talking here, and if they can get 20 or 30k new players a month to drop 20 dollars before abandoning, that might give them a cash-flow they can live with until they get further in their design document. They could also be relying heavily on a sunk-cost fallacy, since there are plenty of people who complain frequently but keep soldiering on (and to be clear, I'm in that category, primarily because I don't assume good will on the part of anyone who wants my money, so am rarely disappointed.). I'm only speculating, based on a more-than-averagely cynical-nature.
 

DeletedUser5800

Guest
I'm with Squirrel on this one, I was in to deep already. I had done all of them because I'm a completionist and had no idea it would end up having been a detriment to have done something. I say if it's optional then everyone should have the option to reset them! If all this 'pick your own path business' was their actual intention (and not blatant ill design), each optional SS tech. should have an undo button on it that just eats your kp and the goods cost but resets it back to nothing. That way those of us that got screwed would have the OPTION of unscrewing ourselves.
 

DeletedUser9601

Guest
One way to balance this for Inno: tournament size is still tied to squad size. And there are still optional squad size techs. But the level of your barracks/camp/grounds sets a hard cap on your squad size.
This would result in some complicated mechanics.
But if its done right, Inno could force the tradeoff of: you can keep your squad size low to have easier tournaments, but you are limited in how quickly you can train up armies.
 

DeletedUser6260

Guest
I say if it's optional then everyone should have the option to reset them! If all this 'pick your own path business' was their actual intention (and not blatant ill design), each optional SS tech. should have an undo button on it that just eats your kp and the goods cost but resets it back to nothing.
Does it also undo any provinces you've won since you learned it and anything you've gotten from the buildings on those expansions, or just pay back the cost of troops used in those provinces and charge you goods (plus maybe coin and supplies) instead? How far back should they keep a record of what we've gotten as a result of each tech? One chapter? All the way to day one? If I made a mistake by building non-boosted factories, can I undo those and get back everything I input while giving back everything they made? Since my initial choice to play an elf turns out to be a bad choice for fighting (which wasn't explained to me before I chose it) can I undo everything since I chose to play an elf and have them re-play the game for me for the last few months as though I had picked human instead?
 

Pheryll

Set Designer
One way to balance this for Inno: tournament size is still tied to squad size. And there are still optional squad size techs. But the level of your barracks/camp/grounds sets a hard cap on your squad size.
This would result in some complicated mechanics.
But if its done right, Inno could force the tradeoff of: you can keep your squad size low to have easier tournaments, but you are limited in how quickly you can train up armies.

Then why not just forget about squad size, and tie it to the fastest troop production center's training speed (ignoring wonder improvements)?
 
Top