Discussion about the the Spells & Magic

[Jojo_Fr]

I find that the main topic of discussion & suggestions is too diversified. It's better to have simplier and distincts topics.

I searched a topic but did not found one so I open it. First questions :

1) Why the adepts can cast the spells of mages ?

2) The strongers spells should be reserved to the mages, or to the archmages no ? Casting a powerfull spell need an advanced training, so being mages.

3) What are the ways to protect a stack from an offensive magic ? Each turn, you can be bombarded by spells, and you cannot heal. How can we minimise or protect our units ?

4) I readed that it is planned (or done) that Adept will cost 100 herbs to build. Personnally, I would prefer that any unit never cost any ressource to build, but much profit to ressoruces by equipement. Because it is a more flexible system, and it offer the choice to have two kind of army : one army without equipement but non expansive, and one army with equipment, but expansive and precious. It you cannot afford ressources temporary you could always upgrape your units after !

Ayway, if adept cost herbs, it will be a problem for Aristarkh especially because they cannot build plantations, and their land is converting to wasteland. Are the Illians capable to build plantation into snow (would be strange) ?

 

[esvath]

1) and 2) will be changed in the next patch.

3) next patch will introduces more ways to protect a unit against spells/elemental damages:
-- arcane units' auras
-- promotions
-- high level armors

4) I can make the Aristarkh arcane units to not require herbs, just like how Clan's arcane units do not require mage guild (hm, maybe I already did it? Need to check).

 

[Jojo_Fr]

- If you stay on the idea that any advanced units (as adepts) should cost ressources, any civ should pay for their Adepts including the Aristarkh.

- In fact, I forgot that Aristarkh have access to one improvement which give them others ressources than quarrels or metal (plus check if give herbs too, I am not sure it does) : I don't remember its name, it's an improvement what you build on any food or luxury ressource. It "consumme" the ressource, without destroyt it. It's expansive, but it give +1 ressource per turn, up to +3 at his high level of developpement (as cottage can developp).

So, in fact it should be ok for Aristarkh to pay the normal prices of herbs (if this improvement give well herbs per turn).

3) Ok it's excellent. Magic protections would be very usefull and interesting.

 

[Jojo_Fr]

5) Do the spells cost scale on game speed ? If not it means the magic orientation is much stronger in quick speed because you have more mana income for a a same cost price.

 

[CarnivalBizarre]

Aristarkh spellcasters are quite useless due to not gaining any xp, so they should be cheap as hell.

 

[Jojo_Fr]

Ah yes. Maybe they should gain XP. Spellcasters cannot being squelettons, zombie or other brainless undead (as they are now if they won no XP), so they should to be an intelligent lich (not with the powers of the true lich/archmage off course), or being vampires or something like that.

 

[Shoobs]

More than any other race, aristrakh should have a limit of how many adepts / mages / liches they can have. Those that they DO have should have an aura similar to the Tomb Lord to an extent, as their flavor tends to be skeleton golems with support. Death through mass rather than more sophisticated means.

Edit: 5% unit support, min 3.

 

[Jojo_Fr]

- I don't agree. Aristarkh are undead necromancers, the necromancers practice magic to live and to develop themself, and their undead hords are animated by magic. To me, Aristarkh are in the lore, in the category or the most magician civilizations, even if they have not the great magister of Armurites or Sheaims.

- Moreover, in the weak magic civs (khazard, luchuirp, clan of ember or doviellos), there is no limit in the number of adept or mages. There is, for the khazad only, an incapacity to have mages, but khazad is the most extreme civ about magic practice.

- I don't understand what you mean when you speak of the Tomb Lord Aura. Tomb Lord aura, Lurid Agitation, should only be owned by the Tomb Lord, and not the adepts or mages (if adept or mages have it, it should be removed from them).

- A question : do the Aristarkh have access to military building which increase the XP gained by their units ? It would be good if they have these XP bonus, as others civs all have, to have stronger vampires, tomb lord and adepts kind units (if Evast decide that Aristarkh adepts can have XP, as all adepts).

 

[Shoobs]

- I don't agree. Aristarkh are undead necromancers, the necromancers practice magic to live and to develop themself, and their undead hords are animated by magic. To me, Aristarkh are in the lore, in the category or the most magician civilizations, even if they have not the great magister of Armurites or Sheaims.

- Moreover, in the weak magic civs (khazard, luchuirp, clan of ember or doviellos), there is no limit in the number of adept or mages. There is, for the khazad only, an incapacity to have mages, but khazad is the most extreme civ about magic practice.

- I don't understand what you mean when you speak of the Tomb Lord Aura. Tomb Lord aura, Lurid Agitation, should only be owned by the Tomb Lord, and not the adepts or mages (if adept or mages have it, it should be removed from them).

- A question : do the Aristarkh have access to military building which increase the XP gained by their units ? It would be good if they have these XP bonus, as others civs all have, to have stronger vampires, tomb lord and adepts kind units (if Evast decide that Aristarkh adepts can have XP, as all adepts).

To me all of your points are against lore, with the exception of the adepts. I never said they should get a strong version of the aura, did I? Do understand I am also arbitrarily setting a fairly stringent limit to how many mages they can have. This makes them magically weak and insufficient - mages are there to support the armies and to make them work, not to lead them as more magically oriented civilizations would be.
Even if they are not given the specific aura from Tomb Lords, they should atleast be able to prevent the loss of the mainstay of the army - skeletons - similar to Tomb Lords at varying levels.

In my view, the Aristrakh follow two paths. One of heavy vampirism, the other of necromancy. And I believe Vampirism happens very late, usually too late for them to really make use of it while Necromancy is useful throughout the stages of the game ad should be more supported than less supported.

Skeletons and zombies don't have exp, thus the building to increase XP seems odd and out of place. And if they do get them, they should get them when the vampires are actually In Play rather than letting you build them excessively early for no reason....

 

[Jojo_Fr]

I never said they should get a strong version of the aura, did I?

No you did not.

Even if they are not given the specific aura from Tomb Lords, they should atleast be able to prevent the loss of the mainstay of the army - skeletons - similar to Tomb Lords at varying levels.

- I don't well understand. The specific aura from tomb lord it's Lurid Agitation (a probability to don't die if the unit loose a fight). Adepts give Lurid Agitation too, which is redondant (I don't like this, I would prefer no aura or another aura, magic protection for example).

- I just thing it's better to don't have redondant function for units. I am not espicially opposed to Luridt Agitation for Adept (Vampires too give it, but they are very late units and limited number), or others possibles supporting auras.

In my view, the Aristrakh follow two paths. One of heavy vampirism, the other of necromancy. And I believe Vampirism happens very late, usually too late for them to really make use of it while Necromancy is useful throughout the stages of the game ad should be more supported than less supported.

- I agree with the fact that Aristarkh follow these two path and I agree with the support function of the necromancy. But now, necromancy only give Lurid Agitation. Vampirism give the Necrosis Spell (a heal for the undead) which is very good, but late spell.

- I would prefer specials spells, specials features, for aristarkh necromancers support units but I don't think any propositions could lead to an actual implantation in the game. I already proposed some propositions in the Aristarkh topic I opened but I have no idea if Evasth would like to apply them.

Skeletons and zombies don't have exp, thus the building to increase XP seems odd and out of place. And if they do get them, they should get them when the vampires are actually In Play rather than letting you build them excessively early for no reason....

XP would be usefull for Tomb Lords, Vampires units, and Adepts units (if adepts are given the faculty to earn XP, what I would find logical). 80 % of Aristarkh units (because brainless) would not have utility to this XP off course. I would like too that any supporting unit in the game, earn XP each time on of his supported units fight ! For exemple the golem masters of Luchuirp should earn XP like that, and the Tomb Lords too (if not, it means it's hard to gain XP for any of these supporting units, which I don't think logical).

 

[User0918]

Tbh, we should let esvath push out the update with the general changes to magic and then start to fine-tune it. At the moment noone except him knows what the exact adjustments will be, and trying to include every possible change for all the factions will probably delay the update indefinitely.

I'd rather work with a framework, instead of taking wild guesses on how my suggestions will coincide / clash with his ideas. I'd say the sooner he puts out the new version, the better, nobody expects it to be perfect. But at least everybody would be on the same page then.

 

[Jojo_Fr]

I would like Evast put my suggestions into MoM Xtended, but I don't calculte when and I don't want anything, I just wish and pray master Evasth lol. ^^