Myrran retort

[Catwalk]

What's the problem with always having 2 Myrran wizards and 2 Arcanus wizards? That's exactly what I was referring to when saying that it's a boring advantage as a Myrran wizard to face one opponent less. It's by far the easiest way to balance it to 1 pick. Seems I agree with Nelphine after all.

[Nelphine]

I actually want it based on difficulty. On normal or easy, 1 on your plane, 3 on the other. On advanced or expert or master, 2 on each plane. On lunatic, 3 on your plane, 1 on the other. (Master could join lunatic for 3 on your plane.)

And I'd make myrran cost 1 pick.

[Catwalk]

Yeah, I agree with it costing 1 pick. I also agree with basing it on difficulty level, if that's easy to do (I'd restrict 3+1 to Lunatic).

[Seravy]

What's the problem with always having 2 Myrran wizards and 2 Arcanus wizards?

You don't get the super powerful Myrran wizard that way which has always been the primary way to have an entertaining late game on Arcanus. You yourself liked that and suggested the AI should play better on Myrror if alone because it's that important.

Also, based on previous experience, a 2v2 setup is actually harder to win and less newbie friendly while not being more fun at all (less trading partners) as an Arcanus wizard, contrary to how it sounds like. If you go too deeply into war with one wizard on your plane, the other will grow stronger and will overwhelm you as it's not being kept in check by anyone, possibly even more so than the 2 wizards on the other plane who have to compete with each other for resources. I've had this happen to me, I didn't know I only have 2 players on my plane so I attacked one, made a pact with the other, assuming the uncharted territory belongs to a third. The one I made pact with conquered all the unknown territory and went out of control even before I could finish my first war. Unlike lone Myrran wizards who can grow even stronger obviously, this situation can't be contained by controlling towers as the enemy is on your own plane - if it happens, you lose on the spot.

[Nelphine]

Eh, with 3, its luck of the draw on personalities. An early 3 way war you always lose. With 2, you can assume exactly the scenario you described - you kill them in order, and you know the second will be much stronger. I prefer to reduce the personality luck factor.

[Seravy]

Anyway, I'm actually not entirely sure which one are you arguing for?

1. Make Myrran 1 pick, no other change.
or
2. Make Myrran 0 pick, make amount of wizards the same for with and without the retort.

I prefer 1.

[Nelphine]

I think you should do same wizards but only reduce myrran to 1 pick.

[Catwalk]

What's the problem with always having 2 Myrran wizards and 2 Arcanus wizards?

You don't get the super powerful Myrran wizard that way which has always been the primary way to have an entertaining late game on Arcanus. You yourself liked that and suggested the AI should play better on Myrror if alone because it's that important.

There should be plenty Myrran opposition with 2 wizards there. I don't recall what I said earlier, but I don't see this as a problem at all. I just want a good end game.

Also, based on previous experience, a 2v2 setup is actually harder to win and less newbie friendly while not being more fun at all (less trading partners) as an Arcanus wizard, contrary to how it sounds like. If you go too deeply into war with one wizard on your plane, the other will grow stronger and will overwhelm you as it's not being kept in check by anyone, possibly even more so than the 2 wizards on the other plane who have to compete with each other for resources. I've had this happen to me, I didn't know I only have 2 players on my plane so I attacked one, made a pact with the other, assuming the uncharted territory belongs to a third. The one I made pact with conquered all the unknown territory and went out of control even before I could finish my first war. Unlike lone Myrran wizards who can grow even stronger obviously, this situation can't be contained by controlling towers as the enemy is on your own plane - if it happens, you lose on the spot.

I don't see having one less trading partner for a little bit as an unfun thing. I also don't think newbie friendliness is that important, you can scale it with difficulty if you like and they need to find a setting they can beat one way or another. In your example, the problem was that the number of wizards on your plane was random.

I'm arguing for Myrran costing 1 and either 2+2 or 3+1 on both planes (possibly depending on difficulty).

[Seravy]

I honestly don't think the retort is worth the 1 pick if the wizards are the same either way, which is why that wasn't even an option I considered.
What do you gain by picking it?
I also don't like changing the Arcanus basic game just for the Myrran retort. I rather have it slightly overpowered than altering core gameplay of the Arcanus plane just to balance it out.

btw isn't 2+2 making early strategies even stronger? You only need to beat 2 people to own the entire plane which is a lot easier then 3, and then you won because it's your whole plane against two wizards with half of each. So that would be bad (on Arcanus).

The other option, 3+1 on Myrror is bad for the reason I explained in the old thread - it gives a huge unfair advantage to Life wizard specifically, who can take over the nearly empty Arcanus plane alone and easily crush the early game units of the wizard their by taking advantage of their race, while everyone still alive has to share the Myrran plane for the next 8-12 years. With 2+2, this tactic is harder to abuse.

So no, I have to say I'm against making changes to the number of wizards on the planes, for the same reasons I was back then. The difference is, I'm no longer against reducing the cost of the retort and think it might actually be necessary, despite the balance consequences.

(If it does prove overpowered at 1 pick, we still have to option to add some sort of other change or penalty that makes Myrran overall weaker)

[Nelphine]

If you always have 2_opponents on each plane, then exactly 1/2 of them are stronger than arcanus races, and 1/2 of them are weaker than myrran races. That's almost a pick. Add in extra treasure and extra minerals, and you have the rest of the pick.

If you change it to 1 pick, with no other change, anyone who DOES play myrran already will do noticeably better (and its already easier than not picking it.) This results in myrran being even better than it already is. Why play anything else, if picking myrran let's you play a full difficulty higher with otherwise the same strategy?


The very fact that we have this much controversy over a 2 pick retort tells me its already in a great place. Although we don't have enough voices so that's a false impression.

I'd personally suggest that seravy switch it to 1 pick, for himself only, for his next 10-12 games; at the very least he'll get to do some testing without being so irritated by it. At the end he'll have some more thoughts on the balance of it, and he can bring that to the table. I personally like that its a different playing environment but obviously I don't speak for everyone.