They released Master of Magic on gog

[Monkeyfinger]

http://www.gog.com/en/gamecard/master_of_magic

I've played a damn lot of games inspired in some way by MoM, but not MoM itself.

A few days before releasing MoM they released the Master of Orion series, which I snagged and was pretty underwhelmed with. Worth 5 bux, sure, but... meh. So short no matter the difficulty and map size, and a little boring. It just feels like not much happens.

So. What's the hivemind's opinion on Master of Magic? I know Kael hates it and it helped inspire him to make FfH in the "I could do better" sense, but what about the rest of you? Do those of you who played both it and orion2 think either is significantly better? (orion2 seems to have just as many old-time strategy gamers nutting their drawers over it as magic does, so I'm curious.)

 

[ADHansa]

MoM worked better when I remember how good I thought it was, then when i actually replayed it. It has really suffered to the teeth of time. Still a lot of nice ideas, but maybe not the most balanced.

MOO2 i don't replay to not taint it for the reasons mentioned above, squared.

 

[lordrune]

For its time it was awesome. There is a little bit of a learning curve as some monsters in the mana nodes can be tricky to defeat, then you work out the most optimal techniques and it all becomes too easy - like most games with diverse tactics I guess

 

[UncleJJ]

For a long time MoM was my favourite computer game. Despite its many faults it had something, an X-factor, that made it worth the trouble and it is still attractive now. I still keep an old windows 3.1 computer that can run it just for that reason. Unfortunately one of the floppy disks is corrupted and I can't load the game onto any of my other computers. I'm interested by the downloadable version from gog.com site and might be tempted.

MoM shows its age but still has some aspects that are better than FfH2, which has supplanted it now as my all-time favourite computer game . The ability to change aspects your own leader in MoM is wonderful. The hero system is elegant with a variety of magical and might heroes. Then there is a design-your-own-artifacts system that really keeps me wanting that little bit extra. That was a real hook for me. All the really great artifacts have astronomical costs and take eons to build, but I get such a sense of achievement once they complete. Then there is the magical system based on mana.

Mana is the heart of MoM and the whole game revolves around getting it and building up the supply. Gold, food, cities and their citizens, hammers, units all are a means to an end of getting more mana. Mana comes from nodes and a few special resource tiles, from some buildings in cities and even some citizens (like elves) give a small mana income. Mana can be used to: research spells, to intervene in tactical battles by casting battle spells, to boost troops before battle by enchantments, to summon magical troops, to create custom artifacts and most important of all to build up your own spell power. By feeding mana into your spell power each turn your character gets progressively more able to cast spells or build artifacts. The really big spells cost a lot of spell points and you can only put your character's spell power worth per turn. So if a spell costs 300 mana and your spell power is 70 it would take 5 turns to complete, increasing your spell power to 80 would make it 4 turns. So for much of the game you're caught in this dilemma of trying to balance using mana on things to improve your empire and on improving your personal magical abilty through researching new spells and improving your spell power. A completely fascinating problem that no other game quite captures. I wish this was FfH2's magical system.

The two games are slightly different in overall premise and I think that is what gives me the different feelings I have about the games. FfH2 is a battle between empires in the Civ sense, I don't feel personally involved. MoM is a battle between several wizards for magical supremacy and I indentify with the character I've designed and the empire I've built. They're mine rather than something I'm in charge of. I'm still waiting for MoM2, FfH2 has filled a void, but it is not a true replacement.

 

[Senethro]

The AI is terrible in the sense that it doesn't play the same game as you, much like most games of that era. It just gives the impression of expanding and building up and all the rest, but really its just getting free stuff on a drip drip drip basis.

How do you feel about tactical turn based battles every time units bump into each other? I found them slow and unwieldy and keeping me from the empire I wanted to manage.

I just couldn't get into it. Its old and it shows.

For comparison I was able to play two games of MoO2 to completion before putting it away.

 

[Breunor]

For me MoM and FfH are the two best. Nothing ever had the otpions available that MoM had - in Civ and even FfH, we get a few trait characteristics and FfH adds Civ characteristics that are defining. But with MoM, the ability to customize based on retorts and books is just beyond belief, and adding the Civ's makes it incredible.

On the other hand, it is buggier than anything. Also, yeah, the AI is terrible. The bonuses they get on high levels is tremendous.

So, it has lots of problems. However, for me it remains the computer game with the greatest strategic depth I've ever seen. Heroes, magical items, the things that you can play with in MoM is almost awe inspiring. Don't ask me to pick between MoM and FfH, but they are both just great.

Best wishes,

Breunor

 

[kumquatelvis]

Never played MoM, but MOO2 remains one of my all time favorite games. Of course, I think I liked customizing my race and my ships as much as actually playing the game.

 

[Jarrema]

I just LOVE MoM. I like the MoO games, but prefer MoM.
The thing I like the most is tactical battle

 

[Folket]

Master of Orion 1 was my favourite game. Master of orion 2 was weird and so much easier.

 

[Neomega]

MoM was great for its time, I played it a lot a lot. The AI was very bad, however.
If it could be played MP only, it would perhaps still be better than FFH IMO.

 

[Lark]

I still play MoO2; I could probably win a game in my sleep. MoM, on the other hand, is frustrating. The customization, the wizard and hero development - it ought to be great. But it's not. It's hard, it's buggy, the pieces don't really fit together, it seems a lot older than MoO because the low resolution affects the game more... And every once in a while when I played it, a game would break out and it would be amazing.

I'm keeping an eye on Elemental. The Elemental for Dummies guide says "Stardock is targeting people who would like Galactic Civilizations or Sins of a Solar Empire." But I'm hoping I'll like it anyway.

 

[Ariminio]

MoM and Orion2 are awesome games, and I don't think they suffered much in the time, MoM a bit more than Orion, but it is much older, too. I still regularly play Orion2, as there just is nothing like it, love the ship customization, the turn based battles and the athmosphere.
Master of Magic sure did age alot, especially the missing AI is terrible, but I can safely say it is still alot of fun to play, even if its your first time, as I have only discovered this game after playing Age of Wonders, and I got really hooked on MoM for a week or so.

 

[Old MacDonald]

I briefly played it way back in the nineties, and I remember enjoying it then.

I bought the GOG edition yesterday, and it's fascinating. I'm pretty much playing it as I would play Civilization, which is obviously not ideal because there are substantial differences. I'm learning as I go, and I see a lot of depth here.

I still don't know if I'm actually going to play it "for real" - I've spent a few hours with it, and I'm still intrigued and keen on learning more. But it's a complex game, and if I'm going to play to win at a decent difficulty setting, I'll need to invest a lot of time.

But whatever happens, I do feel I've got my money's worth. It was only $5.99, and I've certainly had fun with it.

 

[Breunor]

I briefly played it way back in the nineties, and I remember enjoying it then.

I bought the GOG edition yesterday, and it's fascinating. I'm pretty much playing it as I would play Civilization, which is obviously not ideal because there are substantial differences. I'm learning as I go, and I see a lot of depth here.

I still don't know if I'm actually going to play it "for real" - I've spent a few hours with it, and I'm still intrigued and keen on learning more. But it's a complex game, and if I'm going to play to win at a decent difficulty setting, I'll need to invest a lot of time.

But whatever happens, I do feel I've got my money's worth. It was only $5.99, and I've certainly had fun with it.

I've had the exact opposite problem. I played MoM so much (probably several hundred games), that it affects my Civ game. I still haven't gotten over it.

In MoM, playing on 'impossible', strategies like early rush weren't feasible so the idea was to stay away fromthe computer AI as long as possible and build up. My son says it has affected my play to this day.

Best wishes,

Breunor

 

[Jarrema]

I've had the exact opposite problem. I played MoM so much (probably several hundred games), that it affects my Civ game. I still haven't gotten over it.

In MoM, playing on 'impossible', strategies like early rush weren't feasible so the idea was to stay away fromthe computer AI as long as possible and build up. My son says it has affected my play to this day.

Yeah, I have the same problem... I also spent a lot of time playing MoM and I'm still fighting with habits from this game