Posts: 97
Threads: 23
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
Hi everyone,
I was wondering about exploratory games. If I am right, they don't allow players to use a high priestess until turn 4. I understand why this is after reading posts in other threads about the ease of which it could be found the opposing player's capital.
My concern is this: those kingdoms that usually start with a high priestess do not get them, and they are not compensated.
My proposal is this: either give the kingdom that would have started with a high priestess to be the recipient of a refund on the high priestess that they would have had, or just let those kingdoms have their high priestess return to them on turn 4.
My reasoning is this: the games were designed with a balance; if those kingdoms that should start with a high priestess are devoid of this essential cog, then the motor won't work.
Posts: 835
Threads: 39
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
8
Haven't seen this be an issue in any game so far.
Posts: 2,585
Threads: 42
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
7
There was a discussion on this when it first came out. The balance also changes as other factors now effect the strength of a kingdom due to others not having a priestess.
Examples
BL had a HP but is considered one of the better exploration kingdoms due to there group speed.
WI had no HP but can easily due a one for one trade with EL and DW for like PCs and can always teleport a p4 to Viperhead on the first turn. This gives them with no scouting at all a for sure city not able to be blocked by emm. Two towns and two villages. Well on there way to control by T3. So now the WI does not need to spend the gold and influence they normally would to get that HP others like to trade because they also want more PCs for faster control.
Posts: 835
Threads: 39
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
8
Have any exploratory games ended yet? Would be interested to see what nations tend to win. If it's DW/SO/WI, then it's a problem (I discount the RD/GI since they do well regardless of format).
Posts: 5,613
Threads: 619
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
6
Thanks for the replies on this. The reality is that over the years, the kingdoms starting with a High Priestess mutated into almost the opposite of the kingdoms that originally had one. What we see now was not at all related to the original balance in the game. For example, the Trolls start with a HP and the Elves do not.
I am planning on making Exploratory the standard version of the game, unless some compelling reason not to do so comes to light shortly.
Posts: 97
Threads: 23
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
Thanks everyone. My question has been addressed, and I see no problem with it.
Posts: 483
Threads: 18
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
2
I think it's somewhat unbalanced.
I think some positions are at a disadvantage and surely the Giants/Dragons have much better odds of a strong start (as if they needed an edge).
The Dwarves are worse (if that's possible).
-- I don't think because a few turns have run in this format means that all's well.
I think the "intent" is to slow games down which is fine but I also think anyone playing the DW versus a competent RD will auto lose.
Posts: 260
Threads: 3
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
1
I'm playing the Dwarven Lords in #138 - A Steel Exploratory, and I'm having fun with them and don't consider them at all disadvantaged. Some very strong advantages in the mountains and powers against dragons, Giants, and magic. That's all pretty good stuff. I feel a Dwarven king needs to be a political power - that's a nice court that with a little work has 3 dukes, a count, and 3 barons. If you don't want to use your court the Dwarves may not be for you. Otherwise, increase PC defense (they have advantages in the mountains anyway), do some diplomacy, and almost any kingdom would rather go somewhere else than try to invade The Talking Mountains.
Buddy/Ignore List
. G138 is an exploration game as well. The RD is being played by a pro.