Chasity OVERPOWERED

[DHaran]

Chastity halts pop growth, that's all. It does no actual damage, unlike most other spells and ops. It has limited duration in most cases, and limited to only, what, 2 races? It's only useful when you spend loads of mana and resources ruining someone's pop, and even then it can be removed with MV. There is nothing you can say that will convince me it is OP in any way, unless I get hit in the head with a crowbar and suddenly go retarded. I'm done wasting my time with nubs, lol.

[DjTeddySpin]

I agree with you that it is a problem when you are at hostile/war when you have land incoming. Peasants are vital to generate income, assure you to have soldiers to build/train and to keep your BE up. But what is it that makes chastity overpowered compared to all the other options utopia gives us to peasant control? what makes chastity different from an instant effect (FB/KN/Massacres) or a duration dimishing population effect (MS, storms). All the other spells/attacks/ops will result in killing of peasants, while chastity doesnt kill them of but stops peasant growth. Is it the amount of mana it costs? Do too many races have access to it? Is it the spelldifficulty compared to other ppa control spells? Or is it something else? You still didn't explain why chastity is overpowered compared to the other forms of peasant control. I can't answer that question and therefor unless proven otherwise I don't consider it OP.

IMO, its the spell duration, rune cost, complete halt in peasant growth. (its just me)

To say that FB is comparable to Chastity is like I said, only true if you are not moving your province and it is sitting at max pop. A regular combo for depop consists of MS/Storms/Kidnap. Why Chastity make a gay addition to it is because it not only denies your default population growth, it also stop everything else from self spells and homes, which means there's absolutely no way to recover other than getting aid, kidnap or MV.

If I were to cast chastity(no other depop spells) on a 1k acres province, he would be confined to the Military and economy of a 1k acre province no matter how much he had land grabbed or even if he grew to 3k acres. Other than losing army from attacking, thieves from ops or mages from failed spells, you actually had to deal with a severe BE inefficiency. With just a single spell, without even having to do a single op, spell or attack on him. So you are trapped in a contracting balloon that you cannot escape from. If it was a major chain of spells/ops/attacks it'd be more reasonable, but from just one single spell at that rune cost and 12hour duration is ridiculous.

[Humanoize]

Now I understand your point. In this situation chastity is a very efficient way of population control. Still a 12 hour duration I have yet to see. Most are 4-5-6 hours on me, 8 was the longest duration I received this age. Still I think its an illusion to grow into your lands during war if you went from 1000 to 3000 acres. any kingdom with a common sense of the game would peasant either peasant control you or max gain you. but I agree in the situation you are pointing out it is very efficient.

[Palem]

Keep it civil guys. There's way too much flaming/trolling/name dropping in here.

If you can't discuss it politely then don't discuss it.

[DjTeddySpin]

Now I understand your point. In this situation chastity is a very efficient way of population control. Still a 12 hour duration I have yet to see. Most are 4-5-6 hours on me, 8 was the longest duration I received this age. Still I think its an illusion to grow into your lands during war if you went from 1000 to 3000 acres. any kingdom with a common sense of the game would peasant either peasant control you or max gain you. but I agree in the situation you are pointing out it is very efficient.

Yes you have a point there, I do not directly meant growing. But what little you could draft/earn has been cut back tremendously just because of chastity. It's the overall effect of shrinking.

[Pestermenot]

So, uh, does zero population growth really have to be there? how about dropping current pop growth to 10% or 15%? I'd feel sorry for the avians with chastity, even WITH a percentage modifier, but at the moment I feel sorry for ANYONE with chastity. I think (sometimes, honest) that dropping pop growth by 85-90% would be more of a balance than zero growth. It is currently slightly OP and few can deny it in truth.

[Bishop]

If I were to cast chastity(no other depop spells) on a 1k acres province, he would be confined to the Military and economy of a 1k acre province no matter how much he had land grabbed or even if he grew to 3k acres. Other than losing army from attacking, thieves from ops or mages from failed spells, you actually had to deal with a severe BE inefficiency. With just a single spell, without even having to do a single op, spell or attack on him. So you are trapped in a contracting balloon that you cannot escape from. If it was a major chain of spells/ops/attacks it'd be more reasonable, but from just one single spell at that rune cost and 12hour duration is ridiculous.

Not true, you get peasants from trads. Also, because he was fully popped before you cast if it drops off for a tick or two he will be fully popped through natural BR in no time at all. To say you cannot escape from chastity in this scenario is not true in the slightest.

[Luc]

Storms:
Avg. Duration - 12hr when cast by ATTACKERS
Rune Cost - 544 + .544 runes per acre
Kills 1.5% peasants daily

seems
pretty
damn
comparable


gtfo

Ever heard of a spell called nature's blessing? It's a self spell that's really easy to cast and that prevents you from ever getting storms as long as you have it cast. Which spell do I use to get that protection against chastity again? Oh wait, MV is like an awesome counter to all evil spells, so you just have your attackers MV the target and then put storms on them, right?

Not to mention that storms don't cancel out homes, l&p and racial bonuses, just diminishes them. Storms are simply not nearly as effective as chastity, and calling them pretty damn comparable is a horrible argument.

Not true, you get peasants from trads. Also, because he was fully popped before you cast if it drops off for a tick or two he will be fully popped through natural BR in no time at all. To say you cannot escape from chastity in this scenario is not true in the slightest.

If he's focusing on casting a single spell, why would you assume he won't keep coverage up? If you can make such assumptions, he can just add a couple of fireballs a day to nullify all your growth.


Chastity is not a game-breaker, it's not a spell that gets you the tripple crown as soon as you use it. The problem with it is that it makes depop+pop control a way to common strategy in the game, because it's just so very easy. Fireballs are easy to cast and kill plenty of peasants, which used to be balanced by the fact that people could protect themselves from things like storms, and recoup without being an a/t. Such recovery is impossible now that chastity is around, and the thing is, it's not even hard to use. You get the pop down once, and then keeping it there is as easy as going on vacation (a couple of fireballs a day suffices for removing peasants gained through attacks, in case you don't have ms coverage). Someone's population should not be that easy to control, that's where chastity is overpowered. Again, it doesn't break the game, we can live with it, but it does make the game worse. When all your attackers are kept at 2 ppa throughout every single war you fight, you end up having to spend a big part of the age just recovering. That's something we've been trying to get away from for ages, and chastity effectively counters that goal. Make it harder to cast and it will be fine.