The DK goes or I go

[unclemike]

My two cents:  I've played the Deathknights but didn't focus much on it's plague aspect.   I am mostly indifferent on the issue.  Leave it, Scrap it, Nerf it... I don't care.  However I do like a good debate.

Respectfully,  Uncle Mike's proposed defense against the plague, ie Raise Census spells, building fortifications, bazaars, etc., is no defense at all.  It is a wizard consuming, resource consuming, order consuming way to tread water while another kingdom simply posts a brigade in your region.  And that stuff is virtually impossible to do anyway in the early stages of the game.

Conversely, this power has a negligible affect on most kingdoms as companions and summoned troops are most often used today.  It will, however, have a considerable impact on kingdoms that are dependent on pop center recruitment.   An, Ra, No, and many others can be severely compromised as well as anyone who owns Stormgate and wants to recruit there.  

There may be cause for a tweak here but again, i don't feel very strongly about it.


This topic was discussed in a Valhalla thread below.

https://kingdomsofarcania.net/forum/show...n=lastpost

Well, early on, just attack the Deathknight group that is in your region. Like was said in a previous post, if the DK kingdom moves several groups into several regions with only a single kingdom brigade to trigger the plague, it's kind of easy to eliminate that brigade. So, where's the problem of not having a way to prevent the plague? There is none. There is always a means of countering something that is occurring in Alamaze. That is the heart of the debate...

[DuPont]

I want to make clear that my objection to the DK's filthy plague isn't because I've had bad luck playing against them - my first clash with them was as the Fairies, who don't really recruit from pop centers in the first place. My FT game went south for non DK reasons and I dropped my recent AL game simply because I'm so offended by the filthy DKs that I refuse to play against them. They aren't preventing me from using my favorite strategies or anything - I don't really HAVE any favorite strategies, I seek to do different things in each game.
But this idea that the DK's filthy plague can be countered is simply BS. It's not a powered down version of the plague spell at all - that spell does 20% vs the DKs 15%, but that spell also has a 25% failure rate - average it out and it's effect is...15%. And plague is a HIGH LEVEL spell, it's not like Light of the Evening Star or something. Imagine if the FTs or Elves had an automatic 'Charm Region' spell that was cast every turn a group was in a region, for example. Even more so, the plague spell can at least be dispelled, the filthy DK plague cannot be. And it's set off by every damn group with troops.
Yes, you can build a port or what not to raise your census a bit but those are one time effects - the damn plague will wipe that out with no effort at all in another turn. And the thing is, as others have said, the DK has plenty of other nifty new powers - they don't need the plague. There's simply no equivalent to this in the game - no other kingdom has ANYTHING like this - it's bizarre to compare it to the RD's breath, for example.
Either way, I'm firm on the fact that I won't play against the DK and it's shit-encrusted troops. Any game where they are signed up, I won't join or I'll drop if they sign up against me. Even if they are the 12th kingdom - I'll drop on turn 1. I'm not gong to play against those fuckers unless that plague effect is gone. It's the most ridiculous thing I've seen in my 35 years of playing this game.

[VballMichael]

I want to make clear that my objection to the DK's filthy plague isn't because I've had bad luck playing against them - my first clash with them was as the Fairies, who don't really recruit from pop centers in the first place. My FT game went south for non DK reasons and I dropped my recent AL game simply because I'm so offended by the filthy DKs that I refuse to play against them. They aren't preventing me from using my favorite strategies or anything - I don't really HAVE any favorite strategies, I seek to do different things in each game.
But this idea that the DK's filthy plague can be countered is simply BS. It's not a powered down version of the plague spell at all - that spell does 20% vs the DKs 15%, but that spell also has a 25% failure rate - average it out and it's effect is...15%. And plague is a HIGH LEVEL spell, it's not like Light of the Evening Star or something. Imagine if the FTs or Elves had an automatic 'Charm Region' spell that was cast every turn a group was in a region, for example. Even more so, the plague spell can at least be dispelled, the filthy DK plague cannot be. And it's set off by every damn group with troops.
Yes, you can build a port or what not to raise your census a bit but those are one time effects - the damn plague will wipe that out with no effort at all in another turn. And the thing is, as others have said, the DK has plenty of other nifty new powers - they don't need the plague. There's simply no equivalent to this in the game - no other kingdom has ANYTHING like this - it's bizarre to compare it to the RD's breath, for example.
Either way, I'm firm on the fact that I won't play against the DK and it's shit-encrusted troops. Any game where they are signed up, I won't join or I'll drop if they sign up against me. Even if they are the 12th kingdom - I'll drop on turn 1. I'm not gong to play against those fuckers unless that plague effect is gone. It's the most ridiculous thing I've seen in my 35 years of playing this game.

I would just like to know, after all of these posts, how you really feel about the DK.

Personally, I find the ability to be of no use to the DK and does a little harm to a small handful of kingdoms. It is a weird power, but it really does not do much. The DK wins for other reasons.

I find plenty of things in the game I dislike, such as an essentially eliminated kingdom that hangs around for 20 turns (with a couple of wizards and an invisible group) just to harass the player that destroyed them.

I am especially offended by players who don't hit the ready button even though 11 players have been ready for a full day. And they do have orders entered. And it is the same 2-3 players.

But enough with the dislikes. I mostly love the game, so I keep playing.

[DuPont]

Okay, let me put it this way. Plague is a level 5 spell at the lowest (for the NE and, superfluously, the DK). Other evil kingdoms get it even later such as the DE, who gets it at 7. The DK, thus, starts with the innate ability to cast multiple level 5 spells without even burning an order. There is simply no other kingdom that has anything close to this. Even the DE's gate, which has been brought up; all other kingdoms have the ability to choose an artifact on the first turn that will give one of their own emissaries the gate ability.
Also, the damaging effects of plague are front-loaded; more people die the first time it goes off than each time after. In just four turns, half the population of a region will be dead. You can't even hire a HP before turn 4. As I have pointed out before, with deliberate use of groups, the DK has the ability to literally kill half the population of Alamaze by turn 8. Regardless of the effect on gameplay, this is an absolutely bizarrely oversized ability. There is no other kingdom that can do anything even close to this.

[unclemike]

Well, the simple fact remains, if the Deathknight kingdom is so uber-powerful, why aren't they dominating the game? They should be in 1st place every time, and do so, in record amount of time since everyone else is so helpless against them. That's not happening. As mentioned earlier, there are several ways to counteract the Deathknight plague. Their special ability is not overpowered, and in many cases, somewhat inconsequential depending on what others do...

[Ruingurth]

Hi all.
I have not played the Deathnights yet, but I feel the ways to counteract them are not enough. Here is a suggestion. to make a pop immune to the plague build a temple. To make a region immune build a great temple in the region. Perhaps only allow one great temple a region and it only protects your pop centers.

R

[DuPont]

Well, the simple fact remains, if the Deathknight kingdom is so uber-powerful, why aren't they dominating the game? They should be in 1st place every time, and do so, in record amount of time since everyone else is so helpless against them. That's not happening. As mentioned earlier, there are several ways to counteract the Deathknight plague. Their special ability is not overpowered, and in many cases, somewhat inconsequential depending on what others do...

You're still missing the point. I am not saying they are 'uber powerful' and it's true that to some kingdoms, (like the Dragons, for example) their filthy plague would be meaningless. But the fact remains that they start with the innate ability of several Level 5 spells being cast every turn. And more powerful, in fact, as it cannot be dispelled unlike an actual spell. The ways to counteract their plague have a huge cost and are not available to most kingdoms in the early turns, when their plague would be most devastating. I am not sure why it's not clear that the ability to kill over half of the entire human population on the board before turn 10 is considered normal.

[admin]

I have read numerous postings on the topic of the Death Knights' plague capability, and I would like to weigh in on this topic at this time, even though I have never been on either the receiving or giving ends of this plague that is the bone of contention. I'm certainly no "expert" on Alamaze, its design criteria, or the practical effects of how it's many "moving parts" mesh and interact. Me? I'm still trying to get a "feel" for Alamaze. I want to taste its "flavor."

DuPont's "lament" about the Death Knights, while it certainly comes across to me as a heartfelt and sincere complaint, one bolstered by his claim to extensive experience playing the game, nonetheless does not strike me as persuasive (at least, not thus far, it doesn't). Allow me to elaborate.

It doesn't escape my notice that DuPont, while a very experienced player, is not the only experienced player in the Alamaze player community, and even among just the very experienced cadre of Alamaze players, itself, support for DuPont's perception of the plague spell and its severity certainly isn't what I would call "overwhelming." It simply isn't. To the contrary, in fact, counter-arguments have been offered.

I don't seek to belittle DuPont's stated concerns about the death knights' plague ability, but the onus of proof lies squarely with the one making the assertion in question. I'm kind of "new" to the Alamaze player community, and I'm certainly a very recent "newcomer" to actually giving 4th Cycle Maelstrom Alamaze a try. Not too very long ago, I joined a multiplayer game of Alamaze - Game 5644, I think it is. Here's the list of individuals who signed up for that particular game:

         UN    The Crown Islands(1)    The Underworld Cult of Secrets                 Zarashand
         LY    Darkover(2)             The Vile Culture of the Lycans                 shaun tolley
         IL    The Diamond Coast(3)    The Sphere of the Illusionist                  Canticar
         SA    Krynn(4)                The Theocracy of the Sacred Order of Knights   Strylian
         LI    Triumvia(5)             The Empire of the Lizard Kings                 Windstar
         FO    Zanthia(6)              The Lost Assembly of the Forgotten             GrimFinger
         DA    Nyvaria(7)              The Onyx Imperium of the Dark Elves            Harry O
         FF    The Sword Coast(8)      The Encompassing Realm of the Fairy Folk       Eregnon the Black
         GI    Pellinor(9)             The Giants Above The Trembling Ground          uncledarkseid
         WA    Zamora(10)              The Fire Realm of the Warlock                  Runigruth
         RD    Mythgar(11)             The Reign of Terror of the Red Dragons         Vball Michael
         BL    The Untamed Lands(12)   The Dark Skies of the Black Dragons            DuPont

DuPont had already signed up, before I joined the game. I pondered choosing the Death Knights, as my first playable kingdom, but had I done so, DuPont may well have made good on his multiple assertions to not play in games of Alamaze where the Death Knights and their plague capability are in play. Assertions of this nature are not conducive to growing the overall player base of the game. It doesn't make DuPont a terrible person, but do we all get to choose a kingdom that we don't like, and then that kingdom not be available for other players to choose it for that particular game in question? That strikes me as a bridge too far, a veto of sorts. Granted, DuPont doesn't force anyone to play Alamaze, nor to play a particular kingdom, but there's more considerations in play than just what one player doesn't like.


Furthermore, well before any real debate on this subject was undertaken, DuPont had already drawn his Rubicon line in the sand. From my perspective, that is tantamount to drawing a premature conclusion. No data, no debate, just a hard nosed stand. At a minimum, this is bad form. It also isn't fair, either to the programmer, or to the player community at large. Poof! A unilateral assertion or declaration transpires, before any actual debate on the merits and demerits ever even takes place. Is that the essence of fairness? More importantly, is it good sportsmanship?

On the one hand, the art of shit talking could potentially run aground on a platform of good sportsmanship as the only consideration. Yet, even sportsmanship is but one facet or consideration out of many, where a community of players gather together. There is purpose to all things. There is a time and a place for all things. As I tell people, on occasion, there's a time for tact, and there's a time to dispense with tact.

The acquisition and accumulation of experience is not something to be summarily dismissed out of hand. And it may well be the case that DuPont's perception is that his complaint about the plague has not been taken seriously. Perceptions, however, have a way of sometimes supplanting actual reality. Toss in the potential for personality conflicts, or just the rubbing of someone else "the wrong way," and things that actually aren't at the core of the problem complained about can sometimes take on a life of their own, or they can add fuel to the fire of an already existing difference of opinion about a matter that is genuinely viewed as a problem with potentially overpowering ramifications.

To draw hard lines in the sand can prove frustrating to many people who have no bones in a given fight, and especially if they, personally, don't feel strongly one way or the other about something that is a sharp point to someone who is complaining.

Me? My experience over the course of my life has led me to value the art of complaint. Complaints inherently contain criticism. Heck, even constructive criticism contains criticism. Indeed, criticism lies at the very heart of much improvement. Complaints are often a catalyst for positive change. Complaints can become rallying points to gather and coalesce around, they can become rallying cries, themselves!

DuPont not playing doesn't make Alamaze a better game, but neither does a lot of things. Often times, we as human beings have more in common than our differences might at first indicate. Human beings are opinionated creatures. Much merit exists in opinions. Opinions are frequently grounded in experience, ad experience often colors one's perspective.

I wonder, as I sit here typing this off the cuff, how many people here consider their interpersonal communication skill set to be their chief and foremost skill set? Is that unclemike's greatest claim to fame? Is it DuPont's? Heck, is it anyone's? It certainly isn't mine.

I'm pretty sure that, even recently, Mike and I haven't always agreed on every last thing. Say what you may about Mike, but he is pretty knowledgeable about the programming end of things. Indeed, it has fallen to him, for better or for worse, to try and implement a bunch of Rick McDowell's (and perhaps others') ideas. Does anyone believe that Mike has no appreciation for balance and counter-balance considerations?

Tell me this, whatever Mike's shortcomings on the communication end of things might have been, to date, what about the many colorful personalities that Mike makes efforts to respond to and communicate with? Are they always correct? Do they always say things in ways with the avoidance of conflict as their utmost guiding light? I mean, if we're gonna have an open and honest discussion or debate, then let's have just, exactly that.

Is Mike ever "touchy?" Does he ever seem as if he doesn't listen. Are those particular qualities unknown to others that communicate with him? How, exactly, should one respond to individual who draw hard lines in the sand, Rubicons beyond which none may cross, well before any actual debate or discussion in-depth takes place about a particular bone that becomes a point of contention and dislike?

What if Mike were to begin drawing his own Rubicons in the sand? Do this or don't do that, and I'm gone? Would that be any different than DuPont's chosen approach?

Granted, at some point, we all get fed up with stuff. There tend to be limits to our patience. Patience, it's said, is a virtue. Little wonder that all of us seem to possess so little of it, at times?

When individuals are at odds with one another over something, that's when patience is the most needed. If everyone just gets along with one another 100% of the time, then patience isn't needed.

The thing is, sometimes in life, people stake out their respective positions, and the positions, themselves, are inherently problematic to defend, much less to advance in reasoned discussion or debate. Yet, one of the grand ironies of life is that Mexican standoffs don't tend to be in anyone's best interests. Yet, is there any law of the cosmos that precludes people from reconsidering positions that they've already staked out? Nope! Indeed, to consider anew something that one has already given lots of thought to, and that they've already invested a lot of their emotions and reasoning into, sometimes leads to something that humankind likes to call "progress."

Me? I still haven't seen the data. What was it that Mike the Programmer said?

Charles, you mentioned in your post about seeing the data to show that this plague ability is overpowered, but you won't find any. The reason why is that since there are multiple ways to counteract the effect, the plague is of little concern for many kingdoms, and may be ignored by most.

Even now, after all of this time, I still find myself wondering about the actual number of games that this plague issue has manifested itself as the dire threat that DuPont seems to think that it is. If a player as experienced as DuPont can't find a way to overcome this severity of plague, then who can? But at the same time, when DuPont argues counter to his own claim, that doesn't exactly help his case, in my considered opinion.

I did not think having them in my region where I was playing the AL had destroyed my ability to compete or else I would not have offered it as a standby position.

The way that one chooses to make their arguments matters. It just does.

Hello all - unfortunately, I am going to drop my position in this game. I have no problem with the DK player attacking as he's well within bounds but I simply won't play against this filthy kingdom. I'll try to find a replacement but if not, I will post the location of all the Zamora pop centers when I drop. 


Saying that there's ways to fight back against it I also think misses the mark


They aren't preventing me from using my favorite strategies or anything


And then there's this:

And the thing is, as others have said, the DK has plenty of other nifty new powers - they don't need the plague. There's simply no equivalent to this in the game - no other kingdom has ANYTHING like this - it's bizarre to compare it to the RD's breath, for example.

That a kingdom possesses other powers or advantages in their design is not de facto reason for them to not have a particular power.  Likewise, that a kingdom has a power or advantage for which there is no equivalent is no a de facto justification for it to not exist. To the contrary, in fact, asymmetry in game design considerations demand the inclusion of differences. In The Fall of Rome, the kingdoms did possess some differences in their design, but from my perspective, they were generic in the way that they felt. You can't make fantasy races feel differently from one another, when played, by neutering their differences, nor by castrating their strongest claims to being different. Such stand alone lines of argument typically aren't the iron man of persuasion.

I've yet to see a strong case of actual substance made for the diminishment of the plague's strength, much less for it's complete removal. That said, certain powers or advantages or capabilities in the game are disallowed before Turn #4. I've learned that the hard way, already. If some powers are too strong to allow before certain turns, perhaps there are others that fall into the same boat, but which have not been thoroughly vetted. Which brings me to inquire, how much vetting was put into all of these changes and improvements that have been made to make 4th Cycle Maelstrom a reality? Were they vetted by a small community of players or a large community of players? If by a large community of players, then what happened to that large community of players?

A number of DuPont's complaints have included heavy resort to emotion. 

shit-encrusted troops

those fuckers

DK's filthy plague

it's set off by every damn group

most ridiculous thing I've seen in my 35 years of playing this game

their filthy feet

It's a fucking ridiculous power

I am 100% serious about how much I hate this and I'm not going to deal with it.

These are examples of emotion-based reasoning. The resort, frequent or infrequent, to such as some kind of "justification" for elimination of the power in question from the kingdom in question is worthy of heightened scrutiny. Why? Because resort to emotions frequently acts as a "distorting force." Emotion-based lines of arguments are not a gospel of their own. We all have emotions, and we tend to all fall prey to them. But in a debate, even an informal one, or discussion if you prefer that term, the resort to emotion is many times worthy of being highlighted and isolated out. Emotions sometimes compromise our ability, or even our willingness, to debate non-emotion-based merits and demerits of a given issue. Certainly, emotions are not a second-tier aspect of the human species. Some of our highest and most noble of qualities are emotion-based. Love. Mercy. Forgiveness. These are the apex of qualities of humankind.

No man is his own country. Accordingly, a decision to remove a power from a kingdom, and especially when data is not available and the quality or duration of playtesting of it aren't clear, should not be reposed in one person, alone. Yes, DuPont can certainly adhere to this Rubicon that he, himself, has drawn. He is the sole author of it, after all. Likewise, he can equally dispense with it or suspend his adherence to it, if he changes his mind, or if discussion provides him with additional food for thought.

The Alamaze player community and the Alamaze experienced will not be enriched by his absence from games where the Death Knights are in play, but likewise, players have to come to such decisions of their own free will. And not everyone always thinks or makes decisions at the same pace nor for the exact, same reasons.

[Zar@shand]

As I become more experienced in this game I am starting to revise some of my initial thoughts.

The DK Plague is both an advantage against some nations, but equally and perhaps a disadvantage to the DK. The fact that the DK will have a very limited opportunity to recruit from their pop centers could really affect them if they wanted to create a large army, seeing that they have limited companions to use. They do have very good magical power and are evil, so have plenty of summons to offset the ability to recruit many from pc's. In my opinion overall the nation is really strong with good mages, good traits, being evil and stalwart and a strong military, which almost no other nation gets. Clearly they have performed well as they have the highest overall point scored of any nation at this point according to Valhalla.

[DuPont]

I do think that I am somebody who can usually communicate very well but perhaps in this case, I have not succeeded because I don't think the nature of my objection has been grasped. I do not think that the plague ability makes the DK unstoppable or anything. In some ways, it's could be a disadvantage. But what it does, for me at least, is it changes the very nature of the game of Alamaze.

Alamaze is, to me, a heroic fantasy game - a type of setting I have enjoyed since I was a small boy. It is a big part of what attracts me to the game and why I keep playing it, decades after first encountering it. What the DK's plague does, for me, is turn it into something of an apocalyptic game, albeit one with a fantasy background. But at the end of even a successful war with the DK, you will be ruling a kingdom of the dead with the vast majority of your population rotting in the streets of your towns, cities, and villages. This ruins the game for me, I don't want to play that kind of game. Some people enjoy zombie games; I don't, though the occasional attack by the Necromancer in Alamaze does not turn the game into a zombie one. Lots of fantasy novels have (in some form or the other) undead/zombie attacks that the heroes have to deal with. That's fine, it works in the context of fantasy. Even the occasional plague shows up - certainly there's some historical basis for this as well.

But nothing like the DK's endless plague that just keeps killing, killing, killing, and killing until there's only a fragment of the population left. This isn't Lord of the Rings, this is The Stand and I don't want to be playing a game based on The Stand. I don't want to win a game where nearly all of my kingdom's citizens died. I might have 'won' the game, but it feels like a failure.

I made a very deliberate choice to use emotional language because for me this is an emotional thing. It's not based on cold numbers - the Fairy Kingdom doesn't need to recruit but I can't imagine anything more horrifying to a Fairy Queen than to have her population dying like flies and being unable to stop it. Everyone's free to enjoy the game however they wish - I'm sure most don't think of things quite the way I do when I'm paying. But the bottom line is that the DK absolutely ruins the game for me to where it is not fun. What is the point of playing a game where you are not having fun?

I generally have a reputation (I think) of somebody who is fairly calm and unflappable. I chose to use the language I have employed to discuss this topic to convey how viscerally I'm offended by this DK ability. I am going to say very clearly that I HATE it. And under no circumstances will I play a game with the DK in it, not as long as they have this ability. Originally, I was thinking if I was on the opposite side of the map, I could perhaps overlook it but I realize that eventually I'd come into contact with it unless the DK player had an early exit and it would just wind me up. And I'm not going to put myself through that. I want to play a fantasy game, not an apocalypse game.