Debate on Mage Kingdoms Relative Power

[Wookie Panz]

Uncle Mike has certainly shown that you can do a lot with invisible wizards as he stays alive against numerous opponents in the same game.  As a military power you can take away his pc's but it takes a lot of effort to locate and deal with the invisible forces.

[Jumpingfist]

Having recently finished our ready button confederations game that started just after the last east patch was installed and each team consisted of one pure mage. I think this is very relavent to this topic. I would be curious if any of those players felt the pure mage was the weaker of the two kingdoms. For my ram of NE / NO. I felt the Necromancer was still stronger than the NO but not by as much as before the patch. Being the highest magic cost of the pure mages I very much felt the cost of raising wizards to 6 and 7th level. 5th 40k gold, 84k gold for 6th, 105k gold for 7th. The NO even though his max assured spell level was 6 it would cost 96k for a level with only ok spells. Effectively limiting him to level 5. So they topic is about pure mages but I think the tweener and mastery kingdoms actually got hit harder by the spell cost change. Even though the summoning limit did slow things down it just forced me to plan more. Get a couple p5s in the group so I could sit in the wild casting 481 (prestige) and 863(summon wight).
Overall I feel the pure mages are at a good spot purely based on kingdom abilities. In game I think the location will continue to generate winners especially for the three northern ones. I would like to see more focus on improving some of the other kingdoms. Not just by adding brigades. Like the SA they already can likely take out one enemy of there choosing with the first 5-12 turns of the game but they can not really fight once magic starts to develope

[Calidor]

Just a comment but have you previously tried to lower the number of Wizards per Kingdom? Make the test of the Magi tougher..... increase the cost of hiring an adept...

[RELLGAR]

I think I have the solution.  Instead of limiting what the wizard kingdoms can do, I think changing the non Wizard kingdoms is the answer.  Why have a guaranteed wizard power Cap? Is this not already limited if your a disadvantage,  advantaged, supremacy etc.... by the number of wizards you start with, the spells available and the cost of research? 

The caps are not needed and further limits wizards where none are needed. Eliminating all caps would open up more strategies and allow more versatility and balance of kingdom interactions, while still giving wizard kingdoms there advantages in magic, yet non Wizard kingdoms could be on a more competitive playing field toward the end of the game. Yet all things being equal, wizard kingdoms still have an advantage in the end. 

Please share your opinions and thoughts on this idea. I have come up with many pros and no cons removing guaranteed caps. 

Rellgar

[Hawk_]

Given the huge costs involved with raising the wizards of military kingdoms I would say Rellgar's plan could work without unbalancing the game.

[Ohman the heartless]

The main problem I see is that with the exception of the IL, is that the Mage kingdoms can summon, hire companions, and recruit human troops much better than any military kingdom save the TY. Most non magic kingdoms summoned troops all exceed their max wizard training levels. Thus further restricting the size and scope of their militaries. The HA, GN for example are mid range casters at best and possess some of the worst quality kingdom brigades in the game. Just with companion choices the DU gets 9. NE 5, SO 8, WA 7. The IL only gets 3 but can summon 8 different types. The DU can only summons 3, but the other 3 can summon 8 each. Most military kingdoms can't summon at all due to their magical scope!
The Dragon kingdoms don't even have an order available to summon.

[VballMichael]

Give the new limits a chance. I am finding myself seriously hampered by having to choose Research or Summon. Most of the games in process were only affected late in the game where the 799 cost was not important and where lots of summoning had already happened. Let some of the newer games play out a bit. In the current Champion game, mage kingdoms don't seem to be dominating (not yet anyway).

If you let any kingdom go to any mage level, then you have to let mage kingdoms get better troops. Might as well have everyone play the same kingdom but with different names. That would be fairest, but would be boring.

[RELLGAR]

Give the new limits a chance. I am finding myself seriously hampered by having to choose Research or Summon. Most of the games in process were only affected late in the game where the 799 cost was not important and where lots of summoning had already happened. Let some of the newer games play out a bit. In the current Champion game, mage kingdoms don't seem to be dominating (not yet anyway).

If you let any kingdom go to any mage level, then you have to let mage kingdoms get better troops. Might as well have everyone play the same kingdom but with different names. That would be fairest, but would be boring.

I agree give some more time, but I disagree on your second point. I see no evidence of wizards needing better troops. In fact I bet yout could have a battle between a supreme wizard kingdom, say the SO and fight against say the sacred order. Each have 2 groups with 6 wizards And give the SA the same number of wizards of P6 and 10 more brigades (all better troops) in it's army group and the SO will win almost every time if not every time.

Remember the SA can't have the same possible number of wizards as the Wizard kingdom can and they wold be much worse and an inefficient waye to spend gold, but used in a clever plan may be worth it. 

[Ry Vor]

The main problem I see is that with the exception of the IL, is that the Mage kingdoms can summon, hire companions, and recruit human troops much better than any military kingdom save the TY.  Most non magic kingdoms summoned troops all exceed their max wizard training levels.  Thus further restricting the size and scope of their militaries.  The HA, GN for example are mid range casters at best and possess some of the worst quality kingdom brigades in the game.  Just with companion choices the DU gets 9. NE 5, SO 8, WA 7.  The IL only gets 3 but can summon 8 different types.  The DU can only summons 3, but the other 3 can summon 8 each.  Most military kingdoms can't summon at all due to their magical scope!
   The Dragon kingdoms don't even have an order available to summon.

On another thread the argument was made the Red Dragons are too strong.

[Ry Vor]

Give the new limits a chance. I am finding myself seriously hampered by having to choose Research or Summon. Most of the games in process were only affected late in the game where the 799 cost was not important and where lots of summoning had already happened. Let some of the newer games play out a bit. In the current Champion game, mage kingdoms don't seem to be dominating (not yet anyway).

If you let any kingdom go to any mage level, then you have to let mage kingdoms get better troops. Might as well have everyone play the same kingdom but with different names. That would be fairest, but would be boring.

I agree give some more time, but I disagree on your second point. I see no evidence of wizards needing better troops. In fact I bet yout could have a battle between a supreme wizard kingdom, say the SO and fight against say the sacred order. Each have 2 groups with 6 wizards And give the SA the same number of wizards of P6 and 10 more brigades (all better troops) in it's army group and the SO will win almost every time if not every time.

Remember the SA can't have the same possible number of wizards as the Wizard kingdom can and they wold be much worse and an inefficient waye to spend gold, but used in a clever plan may be worth it. 

In Fall of Rome, the main critique was the kingdoms were too similar.  They were all the barbarian tribes around 410ad that led to the Fall of, yes, Rome. 

So an argument to make Alamaze kingdoms more similar is not the direction we are going.  Nor to minimize the nuance between military and magic kingdoms.

To me, it is barking up the wrong tree to ask how mage's can compete militarily with military kingdoms, or how military kingdoms can compete magically with mages.  The whole point is they are different, by design. 

The question is whether magic is overpowering military, economic, covert, political and special abilities.