Braxo wrote:If a player puts together a Queen hunting sub, Navigator with other specialsts, that is a lot of resources put on one sub. So you just need to make it a very costly attack if you see one coming your way.

What makes the Admiral OP is his global, not his direct effect. In fact, the Admiral should never be put in any chance of death, because it is too serious of a loss if he were to die.

strepto wrote:I'm surprised to see no mention of tycoon.

Yeah, tycoon I would probably put 2nd to Admiral, because I prefer speed over power, but they are both similarly OP. Although... tycoon does get 18 hours worth of smuggler, which is typically much more useful than 18 hours with a navigator.

What makes both Ad and Tyc so deadly is that the global effects just snowball out of control. The more bigger you get, the more powerful they get (and they already start so powerful).

kevlargolem wrote:

Braxo wrote:If a player puts together a Queen hunting sub, Navigator with other specialsts, that is a lot of resources put on one sub. So you just need to make it a very costly attack if you see one coming your way.

What makes the Admiral OP is his global, not his direct effect. In fact, the Admiral should never be put in any chance of death, because it is too serious of a loss if he were to die.

strepto wrote:I'm surprised to see no mention of tycoon.

Yeah, tycoon I would probably put 2nd to Admiral, because I prefer speed over power, but they are both similarly OP. Although... tycoon does get 18 hours worth of smuggler, which is typically much more useful than 18 hours with a navigator.

What makes both Ad and Tyc so deadly is that the global effects just snowball out of control. The more bigger you get, the more powerful they get (and they already start so powerful).

Then there's the King, the Security Chief, the General, the Engi... And so forth.
I think what's happening here is we're saying, "Hey, promoted specialists are really strong!"
Um yeah. They are. Because they're essentially two specialists. Of course a General has a stronger effect than an Assassin.
It's also remarkably difficult to get those absurd stacks of doom you guys are describing. More often than not, what happens is a General and Assassin comboed against a Security Chief and Sabo. Both are equally powerful.

Basically what I'm saying is that victory in this game comes from 2 sources. 1.) Effective diplomacy and 2.) Effective use of specialists.
Yeah, the specialists are strong if used well. The same is true of diplomacy. I've never seen someone win alone against a 3-way alliance.
Specialists are a way to gain an edge on your opponent. There's a fine line between an advantage and something "OP," but I feel like the specialists toe that line, as they should.

roadkiehl wrote:I've never seen someone win alone against a 3-way alliance.
Specialists are a way to gain an edge on your opponent.

I've seen this. I teamed up with two other players against the only other player left. We hit him from three sides but he used his specialists so well that he managed to keep all but one mine and ended up second. It was extremely close, he almost ended up first. Like you said, specialists are a way to gain an edge on your opponent.

kinc4id wrote:

roadkiehl wrote:I've never seen someone win alone against a 3-way alliance.
Specialists are a way to gain an edge on your opponent.

I've seen this. I teamed up with two other players against the only other player left. We hit him from three sides but he used his specialists so well that he managed to keep all but one mine and ended up second. It was extremely close, he almost ended up first. Like you said, specialists are a way to gain an edge on your opponent.

That doesn't sound like "winning". That just sounds like barely holding on.

therealben wrote:

kinc4id wrote:

roadkiehl wrote:I've never seen someone win alone against a 3-way alliance.
Specialists are a way to gain an edge on your opponent.

I've seen this. I teamed up with two other players against the only other player left. We hit him from three sides but he used his specialists so well that he managed to keep all but one mine and ended up second. It was extremely close, he almost ended up first. Like you said, specialists are a way to gain an edge on your opponent.

That doesn't sound like "winning". That just sounds like barely holding on.

Depends on your definition of winning. He didn't get first, but second. Barely first.

therealben wrote:

kinc4id wrote:

roadkiehl wrote:I've never seen someone win alone against a 3-way alliance.
Specialists are a way to gain an edge on your opponent.

I've seen this. I teamed up with two other players against the only other player left. We hit him from three sides but he used his specialists so well that he managed to keep all but one mine and ended up second. It was extremely close, he almost ended up first. Like you said, specialists are a way to gain an edge on your opponent.

That doesn't sound like "winning". That just sounds like barely holding on.

It's a win for him. It was probably surprising he was able to stay in the game because he was getting triple teamed.

roadkiehl wrote:I've never seen someone win alone against a 3-way alliance.

i had one game where i was getting attacked on 4 sides by players throwing everything they had at me. and was still able to hold well enough to come in 3rd, beating 3 of the 4 players attacking me.

though that was using the diplomat pir/nav glitch heavily, because i didn't know it was a glitch yet.

roadkiehl wrote:Then there's the King, the Security Chief, the General, the Engi... And so forth.

I've never used the King, but he sounds extremely situational and risky (also requires Hypnotist, who is worthless unless in the right situation). Security Chief is very good but situational, is also hard-countered by Infiltrator. General is consistently good if not a bit overrated. None of these hold a candle to the Admiral and Tycoon.

roadkiehl wrote:I think what's happening here is we're saying, "Hey, promoted specialists are really strong!" Um yeah. They are. Because they're essentially two specialists...

If they were 2x as strong as regular specialsts, I would agree with you and this wouldnt even be a discussion. The problem is these two Specialists are 3x,4x, maybe even 5x stronger than other base lvl specialists. If I were in a game and someone said they would trade me a pirate, a revered elder, a diplomat, an intellegence officer, 2 saboteurs, a double agent, and a hypnotist. All I had to give them was an Admiral or Tycoon. I STILL would almost always say no, unless I had a strong situational use.

Also keep in mind the utility of promoting vs. hiring new specialists. Promoting not only gives you a garunteed strong alternate option if you get a bad 3 for your hiring round, it also gives you the luxury of having your promoted spec right where you want them as they are hired, rather than taking the time to have to move them from your usually distant queen up to the action.

roadkiehl wrote:It's also remarkably difficult to get those absurd stacks of doom you guys are describing. More often than not, what happens is a General and Assassin comboed against a Security Chief and Sabo. Both are equally powerful.

What? We arnt talking about "stacks of doom." We are talking about 1 hire, automatic promotion. Very easy, very powerful.

I also have no idea what youre talking about with your "more often than not" scenario. I dont even see how Sabo synergizes with Sec Chief.

roadkiehl wrote:Basically what I'm saying is that victory in this game comes from 2 sources. 1.) Effective diplomacy and 2.) Effective use of specialists...
...I've never seen someone win alone against a 3-way alliance. Specialists are a way to gain an edge on your opponent. There's a fine line between an advantage and something "OP," but I feel like the specialists toe that line, as they should.

You took the whole thread off the rails with this one. Diplomacy has nothing to do with this discussion. We are comparing specs to the other specs, and pointing out how they are balanced and imbalanced with each other. Unless I missed something, no one ever suggested that the role all specialists play is somehow out of balance with the other aspects of the entire game, (diplomacy, skill, time playing, etc).

kevlargolem wrote:

roadkiehl wrote:Then there's the King, the Security Chief, the General, the Engi... And so forth.

I've never used the King, but he sounds extremely situational and risky (also requires Hypnotist, who is worthless unless in the right situation). Security Chief is very good but situational, is also hard-countered by Infiltrator. General is consistently good if not a bit overrated. None of these hold a candle to the Admiral and Tycoon.

I am using a King in my current game. I was pushed back from the beginning until I only had one factory left. So I thought I could get a king, gives me 20 shield plus the drillers he kills and because I don't have any other outposts there is no downside. I was extremely hard to kill so the 2 players that attacked me from the start just started to ignore me. Now I have a King and one sub with 100 drillers, a thief, a helmsan and an infiltrator. I can attack outposts with 40 drillers and 20 shields and still have more drillers after the battle than before. I just run through enemy territory and take one outpost after another until I get their mines. Soon I will have another sub with an infiltrator and thief, so I can do this in both directions. And they can't kill my queen, there are 100 drillers too. They would need alone 94 drillers to only kill 1 of mine. They have to attack with great numbers which is good for my sentry. And my inspector charges my shield after every battle. They don't even try anymore to get my queen, they just recapture their outposts while I just steamroll through their territory. Wouldn't be possible without the King.

I agree about the Tycoon, we have a player with 14 factories and a Tycoon. He is producing nearly 400 drillers a day. I don't know if I would put the Admiral over the Tycoon though. He is useless if you use offensive specialsts like the Infiltrator. Sure, you can get your drillers faster where they are needed. But if you don't have a massive amount of outposts I think the smuggler is doing this job better. And he promotes to Tycoon which is extremely usefull especially with a large amount of factories.

kevlargolem wrote:

roadkiehl wrote:Then there's the King, the Security Chief, the General, the Engi... And so forth.

I've never used the King, but he sounds extremely situational and risky (also requires Hypnotist, who is worthless unless in the right situation). Security Chief is very good but situational, is also hard-countered by Infiltrator. General is consistently good if not a bit overrated. None of these hold a candle to the Admiral and Tycoon.

roadkiehl wrote:I think what's happening here is we're saying, "Hey, promoted specialists are really strong!" Um yeah. They are. Because they're essentially two specialists...

If they were 2x as strong as regular specialsts, I would agree with you and this wouldnt even be a discussion. The problem is these two Specialists are 3x,4x, maybe even 5x stronger than other base lvl specialists. If I were in a game and someone said they would trade me a pirate, a revered elder, a diplomat, an intellegence officer, 2 saboteurs, a double agent, and a hypnotist. All I had to give them was an Admiral or Tycoon. I STILL would almost always say no, unless I had a strong situational use.

Also keep in mind the utility of promoting vs. hiring new specialists. Promoting not only gives you a garunteed strong alternate option if you get a bad 3 for your hiring round, it also gives you the luxury of having your promoted spec right where you want them as they are hired, rather than taking the time to have to move them from your usually distant queen up to the action.

roadkiehl wrote:It's also remarkably difficult to get those absurd stacks of doom you guys are describing. More often than not, what happens is a General and Assassin comboed against a Security Chief and Sabo. Both are equally powerful.

What? We arnt talking about "stacks of doom." We are talking about 1 hire, automatic promotion. Very easy, very powerful.

I also have no idea what youre talking about with your "more often than not" scenario. I dont even see how Sabo synergizes with Sec Chief.

roadkiehl wrote:Basically what I'm saying is that victory in this game comes from 2 sources. 1.) Effective diplomacy and 2.) Effective use of specialists...
...I've never seen someone win alone against a 3-way alliance. Specialists are a way to gain an edge on your opponent. There's a fine line between an advantage and something "OP," but I feel like the specialists toe that line, as they should.

You took the whole thread off the rails with this one. Diplomacy has nothing to do with this discussion. We are comparing specs to the other specs, and pointing out how they are balanced and imbalanced with each other. Unless I missed something, no one ever suggested that the role all specialists play is somehow out of balance with the other aspects of the entire game, (diplomacy, skill, time playing, etc).

Um, you're not a very polite person are you? I have my opinions, which are supported by months of experience playing this game (how long have you played, sir?)

I used to think the same thing about the king, until I actually used him. The king is extremely powerful. I used to think the security chief was so extremely broken (the same way you think admirals are gods) until I started genuinely trying the other specialists.
What you have to understand is that yes, the king and security chief are niche specialists. But they all are. Every single specialist in this game is very good sometimes and very bad others.

If you thought my example with the security chief/sabo was bad, then you missed my point. My point was that they don't have synergy. That happens. Each specialist serves its function.

If you thought my comparison to diplomacy was bad, then you missed the comparison. I was not saying that specialists balance diplomacy. I was saying that specialists give an edge in combat in the same way that an alliance does. Neither are technically "fair" in the way most people use it. But it's the way this game works.

Listen, I've seen your posts elsewhere on the forums, and I even agree with you on a lot of topics. But to be frank, you're a jerk. You didn't read my post to understand, you read my post to debate it. You didn't read my post to hear the opinion of another human being, you read my post to impress us all with your supposed intellect. And I know this isn't the only time that you've responded this way.
Treat people with respect if you want respect. You assume you know more than everyone else on the forums, and that's a problem.