# Monster Keep — Formulas and/or equations towards "Race Balance"

So following some advice from Ramon (@X3M), I decided to some "Race" planning... Basically I've been thinking about HOW each race should exist and what are the "broad lines" of each race. Here's my conclusion to this effort.

Race Class Dice Attack Defense Loot
Humans Order Both Medium [3] Weaker [2] Stronger [4]
High Elves Life White Medium [3] Medium [3] Medium [3]
Dwarves Strom Black Stronger [4] Weaker [2] Medium [3]
Gnomes Technology White Strongest [5] Weaker [2] Weaker [2]
Wood Elves Nature Both Medium [3] Stronger [4] Weaker [2]
Dark Elves Chaos Black Stronger [4] Medium [3] Weaker [2]
Undead Death Black Weaker [2] Weaker [2] Strongest [5]
Giants Frost White Stronger [4] Stronger [4] Weakest [1]
Orcs Fire Both Strongest [5] Medium [3] Weakest [1]

It's still very much a Work-In-Progress (WIP) ... But I feel good just "drafting" this preliminary "Design Plan" as an OVERVIEW of all nine (9) races. This clearly gives me some "direction" that I can GENERALLY design the future races with some "broad lines" (as mentioned above).

### I didn't see this yet

My post in the other topic is from right before.
I get back to this later. Since it looks interesting ;)

### 9

I see that the sum is 9 all the time.
With 5 as maximum and 1 as a minimum.
I don't know how the stats work exactly in your game.
It is a nice start.

6x 531
3x 522
3x 441
6x 432
1x 333

That is 19 factions in total. And you have the combinations of the dice by a factor of 3. 57 possibilities. You are set for...?

### Indeed 9

X3M wrote:
I see that the sum is 9 all the time. With 5 as maximum and 1 as a minimum. I don't know how the stats work exactly in your game. It is a nice start.

Yeah the stats themselves go from 1 to 9. And this is what they mean:

 Strongest [5] = 5-6-7-8-9 Stronger [4] = 4-5-6-7-8 Medium [3] = 3-4-5-6-7 Weaker [2] = 2-3-4-5-6 Weakest [1] = 1-2-3-4-5

There are three (3) dice options (as you indicated):

 Both = Have a Black and White matching value Black = Have a Black matching value White = Have a White matching value

### Designing some RULES

Much like in Magic ... I am trying to establish some RULES. And generally speaking most units will fall into the category. Since the stats are very lenient and have multiple values, I really GUESS there is no need to break the rules. We'll have to see how the races develop over time. But for now it is my intent to STICK with these "Rules".

Like ORCS have the "Weakest" LOOT. What exactly does that mean???

Generally speaking it means that on AVERAGE "Orcs" tend to drop LESS loot than the other races (in comparison). It doesn't mean ALL "Orcs" drop only one (1) Loot. Not true. In fact "Orcs" do drop loot, however in quantities less than say "Humans"!

### Loot?

If your card is strong. But also hardly drops any loot.
Does that mean the loot is usual for the player that looses the card???

Or else, a low loot and high strength seems to be double to me.

### Not quite so true...

X3M wrote:
If your card is strong. But also hardly drops any loot.
Does that mean the loot is usual for the player that looses the card???

Or else, a low loot and high strength seems to be double to me.

Yeah I understand what you mean by DOUBLE. Correct me if I am wrong but what you are saying is that "High Attack" and "Low Loot" is like a DOUBLE "advantage", right???

But in fact, the issue is closer to: EACH PLAYER must collect sufficient LOOT to WIN!

So if you drop LOWER amounts of Loot... It's NOT an advantage. It just means that winning the game is MORE difficult for ALL PLAYERS. The "Orcs" do benefit from BOTH dice (Black and White ones) so you have higher odds of actually collecting said Loot.

Generally speaking, you probably wouldn't want your ENTIRE "Micro Deck" to be with ONLY "Orcs". Lowest dropping of Loot prolongs the game probably into the last turns of the game (turns 10-11-12) in order to determine the winner...

Therefore NO, having "High Attack" and "Lowest Loot" is not a DOUBLE advantage... it's more of a disadvantage to all players. But YES, you did bring up a VALID point!