Spells with no direct and/or equal counter:
Vermin
Expose Thieves
Greed
Fools Gold
Pitfalls
Fireball
Chastity
Lightning Strike
Explosions
Nightmares
Meteor Showers
Tornadoes
They've all got no direct and equal counter, so they're OP and should be removed. You heard it from dj himself.
Chastity is most certainly not a death sentence. It requires less activity and coordination to counter it than it does to keep it on you.
Did I see someone say a mage's job is to...
...Use their stealth?
...Um...
That's a thieve's job.
Surely your mages are not sitting there with 100% stealth through your wars? Even someone not being a thief can update SoTs or do soms if a halfling is not present. And if a target has been decimated enough, nightstrike runs from nonrgoues is a perfectly viable strategy aswell.Originally Posted by Pestermenot
Everyone should get an SoT that can, if they are a thief or thief hybrid that is part of their job (along with NS, KN, AW, etc.), if they are a mage, their job is casting spells.
Back on topic:
Chastity is overpowered by a lot, I'd say drop peasant growth by a % that can be made up for with high enough homes + L&P and all is peachy.
I know that aiding soldiers to release as peasantry, kidnap, and just about every other way to counter chastity (ever seen it RM back on the caster? One of my kd mates posted it in the forums once, very satisfying) are uphill battles and not "effective" but I'd hate to see it nerfed too much...
EDIT: Though a small nerf is needed.
Last edited by Pestermenot; 21-06-2011 at 17:52.
Idk why you need to take such a simple sentence and blow it out of proportions just so you can make a point to post in the forums.
The 'direct and equal counter' argument came about when you and bugulu decided to suggest that kidnapping is an effective way to counter chastity or worst the fequent chastity+ms+storms combo, which I point out that it isn't even close to worth the trade-off, not to mention you do not try to undermine the over poweredness of chastity simply by suggesting there's a weak alternative(which is the main point all along). NEVER ONCE, did I say anything about removing spells because there isn't a 'direct and equal counter' against them, obviously you made that up.
Last edited by DjTeddySpin; 21-06-2011 at 18:28.
There is no reason to believe that the counters are weak. They absolutely work as an effective measure against chastity.
Then, you moved to say that it WASN'T effective because they can simply FB your pezzies away, but they can ALWAYS FB your pezzies away. This is more an argument that FB is OP, not chastity.
I DID NOT say anything about FB. You can check all my previous posts. I said it wasn't worth the stealth for peasant trade off.
How much do you actually get from kidnapping and how much do you lose from zero peasant growth(or the chastity+ms+storms combo)? Idk how you did the math, considering the failed ops, thief deaths and low exchange rate for the hourly 5% stealth kidnapping vs growth(without chastity), how did you even make it out to be an 'ABSOLUTELY effective measure' against chastity...
Last edited by DjTeddySpin; 21-06-2011 at 18:39.
My mistake, but none the less, you still stand behind the same argument of "they will just be taken again" which has nothing to do with chastity being over powered.
Actually no I don't, the main concern all along has always been the duration, complete growth halt, high success chance and low rune consumption. 'they will just be taken again' was brought up by E Jade who was trying to make a point that releasing soldiers is not the wisest move, and was not a response to the active chastity argument, but rather a response to one of the suggested 'solution'.
Chastity doesn't have a high success chance. It's a fairly tough spell. The issue is it's so cheap it can just get spammed until it succeeds.
I'm all for making it more expensive, but it's duration, function, and success rate are all fine by me.
The complete growth halt is still pretty OP to me. An average Mage can cast a 9-10hour chastity. If every tick you see a difference of 2% peasant growth, for 9 ticks, you gain ~10.5% when you're at HALF the population(and 21.89% when full pop). How is this spell not ridiculous? Especially when stacked with MS and Storms.
Last edited by DjTeddySpin; 21-06-2011 at 19:13.
I'm pretty sure the Max duration for chastity is 8 hours. You typically see more along the lines of 4-5 hour durations. 9-10 hours is just not realistic especially for an "average mage"
And I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers from, but they're off. Using my own population right now (34524)...half would put me at 17262. Since no one runs 100% pezzies, we'll say 35% of the population is pezzies. So that puts me at 6042 pezzies. Assuming 2% BR on each tick, we get...
6162
6286
6411
6540
6670
6804
6904
7079
7221
So after 9 ticks I would have gained 1179 pezzies and that's assuming I wasn't drafting, nor training wizzies, or lost any pezzies through any means in any of the ticks. I would have gained back 3.4% of my pop, not 10.5%.
Does anyone know (moderators?) exactly how many of the game's players actually stop by to chime in on these issues? I feel like what we're seeing here is just a small sampling of Utopian players, and a very poor representative sample at that. Most of the people who post in these forums are the more "hardcore" players, who take the time to sit down and understand all the calculations that make up the game. (Personally, I'm not one of them, I get a headache trying to work out all the decimals and percentages of how many peasants are going to be born while Tornados are wrecking my lands and Fireballs are blowing up my peeps and Housing Sciences are providing a 7.489% population boost, etc...)
My point is, there are a lot of casual players out there looking for a casual game. They don't plan on logging in every 5 hours to kidnap another 1000 peasants to make up for the 2500 that weren't born because of Chastity. I understand that this is a very general argument that could be said about any number of different spells, or ops, or attacks, but the fact of the matter is is that I've seen two players quit the game this age specifically because of Chastity. It made the game a burden, and generally not fun for them. Who knows how many others quit because the game wasn't fun anymore? I mean, yes it's strategy and war, but it is also a game. I think the overall idea of the spell is great, and an effective strategy to employ in war, but the severity of its impact may be negative for the game itself.
In my opinion, setting a % reduction to birth rate would be a very effective fix to the problems that chastity presents right now. It doesn't remove it from the game, it makes it easier and more enjoyable to employ as it becomes a more strategic weapon rather than just a bomb that needs to be left sitting, and if anything, it gives mages more chances to prove themselves as "good" or "great." Anyone can create a Faery Mystic and leave Chastity on a target for 3 days and destroy them, but only great mages can cause the same level of devastation with less powerful spell.
Anyway, I hate posting serious comments on here, because then everyone comes back around and tears down my great ideas. Go on, bring on the flame.
Chastity is a great addition to the spellbook. The spell alone is not overpowered due to the small duration and it doesnt do any 'real' damage at all. It gets powerfull once it's combined with certain spells / ops / attacks. Although I ve never used it and received about a ton of them upon myself I still consider chastity as a nice tool for a underpop strat. allowing the underpop strat to be effective, due to chastity, adds a nice piece of variation to the game.
I share the opinion with bugulu to leave it untouched or slightly increase the rune cost if it really has to be nerfed. Imo chastitity is one of the best implanted changes since I started playing a long time ago.
if you look at it like this 1 chastity is the same as 2 fireballs after 9 hours. thats not a hard / expensive spell as well. I dont hear people complaining about being FB'd to 1-2 ppa. peasant-grow without chastity will be insignificant at that point, with the ever lurking danger the same players logs in 12 hrs later to place you back at the same ppa with minimal effort. I really don't understand the aversion against chastity, if you nerf it there will be simular strategies to keep the same effect. (even deeper peasant reducements)
Last edited by Humanoize; 22-06-2011 at 00:54.
Yes, you are partly right on that calculation, but you are comparing current peasant count on the starting point then using the calculated amount and matching it against the entire population afterwards, of course the birth rate seems diminished. The last war I had been in, I swear I had a 12hours chastity on. And no, they aren't that short on duration, an average attacker from the opposing KD can even do 4-6 hours chastity on average.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote