|
| Thread: Reworking of Dark and Light Magic - a thought experiment |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · NEXT» |
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
posted April 12, 2007 11:11 PM |
|
|
Reworking of Dark and Light Magic - a thought experiment
As the title states, this is a thought experiment hatched during the discussions in the excellent (hint hint) Perfect Balance thread. The subject is whether one could possibly imagine to rework Dark and Light Magic so that they become less dominating in the game. This is necessary, because factions like Dungeon and Inferno currently is very badly off in the game because they have no effective counters to these schools.
This thread overlaps a lot with ZombieLords Spell Balancing thread, but takes a slightly different approach.
Limit to effectivity
The problem for me with Light and Dark Magic is that you can affect an infinite amount of creatures. For example, no matter how strong or weak your Hero is, if the enemy has a legion of Paladins, you can use Puppet Master to control them. This to me is very unrealistic, and gives Dark and Light Magic a complete advantage over Destructive Magic: Destructive Magic works in absolute numbers, thus your Lightnign Bolt will do the same damage to 1 Paladin as to 1000.
Therefore, I think one should introduce some limit to effectivity of Dark and Light Magic spells. This could be implemented in many ways, this is just one suggestion, which concerns:
- Hero Spell Power: SP
- Effective size of stack: ES = # creatures / weekly growth.
The effective size could also be defined from stack power (number * power) or stack health (number * hp), but for evaluating the example, this is most simple:
Restrictions
The restrictions could be some of the following:
- When SP > ES: Normal effect.
- When SP < ES: Effect reduced.
Reduction can either come in form of a reducing a counter as SP / ES *or* to introduce a Chance of Succes for the spell calculated as SP / ES - or both!
Examples:
Puppet Master: A Wizard has a Spell Power of 10. The Wizard wants to use Puppet Master in a battle vs. a Knight. He can affect normally any stack of Effective Size <= 10, this would be 10 Angels, 20 Paladins, 30 Inquisitors, etc. Imagine the Knight has 8 Angels and 30 Paladins: The Wizard can control the 8 Angels normally, because his Spell Power is greather than their Effective Size (10 > 8/1). However, the Paladins have a larger Effective Size than his Spell Power (10 < 30/2), and therefore, the effect will be reduced.
Either, one could put a chance of success for the spell, which would be 67 % (10/15), or one could scale the effect of the spell, so that the Paladins would only do 67 % damage. The former approach would give a more effective spell, but would have the annoying effect of reducing reliability, which is very annoying. The latter approach would in my oppinion be better, because it would give a reliable spell, but reduce it's potency - it would also make logically sense, because the 67 % damage corresponds to the 20 Paladins that the Wizard can control doing damage, whereas the remainin 10 are inactive [although they do move with the stack].
Endurance: As another example, let's consider the Endurance spell. I'll compare the effect of a Wizard with Spell Power 15 and a Knight with Spell Power 5 using the spell, both have Expert Light. Let's imagine they use it on their respective stacks of level 4 creatures: 50 Mages and 50 Griffins, corresponding to effective stack sizes of 10 (weekly growth is 5). Wizards can therefore use Endurance with full effect (SP > ES), and Magi gain +12 Defence. Knight, on the other hand, can only use it with reduced strength (SP < ES), and his Griffins will only receive +6 Defence (SP / ES = 0.5). Had the stack sizes been 100 (ES = 20), the Wizard would have provided a +9 bonus only for his Magi, whereas the Knight would have provided a +3 bonus.
Please note, that the specific numbers listed here are a result of the parameters chosen - they could be changed if one feel that the numbers here are too low - this was just to give an overall example of how a scaling with Spell Power could be introduced.
Suggestions for specific spell modifications:
Light Magic
Bless: Factor t scaled as SP/ES when SP < ES.
Haste: Initiative bonus scaled as SP/ES when SP < ES.
Cleansing: No change.
Endurance: Defence bonus scaled as SP/ES when SP < ES.
Righteous Might: Attack bonus scaled as SP/ES when SP < ES.
Deflect Missiles: Damage reduction scaled as SP/ES when SP < ES?
Magic Immunity: Target gains Magic Resistance equal to SP/ES when SP < ES.
Teleportation: No change?
Word of Light: No change.
Resurrection: No change.
Dark Magic
Weakness: Factor t scaled as SP/ES when SP < ES.
Slow: Initiative penalty scaled as SP/ES when SP < ES.
Vulnerability: Defence reduction scaled as SP/ES when SP < ES.
Decay: No change.
Confusion: Effected ratio scaled as SP/ES when SP < ES.
Suffering: Attack penalty scaled as SP/ES when SP < ES.
Frenzy: Only limited portion of stack is effected, damage done by unit scaled as SP/ES when SP < ES.
Blindness: Chance of Success calculated based on SP/ES when SP < ES.
Puppet Master: Only limited portion of stack is effected, damage done by unit is scaled as SP/ES when SP < ES.
Curse of the Netherworld: No change.
Summoning Magic
Phantom Forces: Number of Phantoms created equals SP/ES times original stack number when SP < ES.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
dschingi
Famous Hero
the guy with the dragon golem
|
posted April 13, 2007 12:54 AM |
|
|
I'm still not sure if it's necessary to change Light&Dark. I'm not saying the balance between the spell scholls is perfect now, but it's not really that bad and I just fear that such a change could easily make things worse...
It's true that these two become better the longer a game lasts and the more troops become available.
However, giving spellpower more influence to Light&Dark doesn't solve this problem at all, instead it just favours hero classes with high spellpower. I'm not completely against that idea, but if this should be included, then it should be for other reasons.
Taking the size of a stack into account for most spells is indeed different. Maybe it's a good idea, I don't know. But even then I wouldn't change the spells from lvl 1-3, maybe only the rest. We should look at each spell differently and balance them seperately... that's my opinion.
____________
open source for an open mind
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted April 13, 2007 08:53 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I'm still not sure if it's necessary to change Light&Dark. I'm not saying the balance between the spell scholls is perfect now, but it's not really that bad and I just fear that such a change could easily make things worse...
Well, I think it's pretty bad, actually. Have you ever tried to play a game without Light and Dark magic? I made the mistake of not picking Light Magic in the Sylvan campaign recently [tried for Nature's Luck], and Dark Magic completely pawned me. The ballance between Light and Dark right now is fine, but without any of them, you're in serious trouble.
Quote:
It's true that these two become better the longer a game lasts and the more troops become available.
However, giving spellpower more influence to Light&Dark doesn't solve this problem at all, instead it just favours hero classes with high spellpower.
Hmmm ... yes, I agree with that - and that is indeed one of the reasons why I would want to do it. As it is now, the Knight levels up in Attack and Defence, which gives his troops a huge impact. At the same time, with a minimum increase in SP and Knowledge, he can use almost all Light Magic spells (save Resurrection) (or Dark Magic spells) at full impact [if he learns the skill]. On the other hand, the Wizard levels up in Spell Power and Knowledge, which leaves his troops relatively more vulnerable, without making the spells better. Sure, he will have more Mana, but you don't need much more than 50 Mana to use Mass Haste, Maste Endurance, Mass Righteous Might and Mass Divine Strength. And sure, his spells will last longer, but honestly, how often does the combat last much more than 5 rounds?
Therefore, I think with the current system, the Knight get's both Might and Magic, whereas the Wizard get's only Magic. And I think a Spell Power counter not only on duration but also strength would be a really nice way to make up for that.
Quote:
Taking the size of a stack into account for most spells is indeed different. Maybe it's a good idea, I don't know. But even then I wouldn't change the spells from lvl 1-3, maybe only the rest. We should look at each spell differently and balance them seperately... that's my opinion.
I'm not sure I get the thing with the level 1-3 spells not being affected, but I agree that such a change should not just be made at random, but would require serious evaluation on a lot of accounts. I intend this as a means of getting an overall discussion of the whole concept, not as a final version of something that should be implemented right away.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
dschingi
Famous Hero
the guy with the dragon golem
|
|
posted April 13, 2007 11:46 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Well, I think it's pretty bad, actually. Have you ever tried to play a game without Light and Dark magic? I made the mistake of not picking Light Magic in the Sylvan campaign recently [tried for Nature's Luck], and Dark Magic completely pawned me. The ballance between Light and Dark right now is fine, but without any of them, you're in serious trouble.
Of course Light&Dark spells are a big help for an army. Though you shouldn't forget that in order to get good spells you also have to build mage guilds which cost a good amount of resources that you don't always have. Besides you don't always get the spells you want. That's bad especially if you rely on one magic school only.
Ok, in campaign it's always a good idea to take light or dark if you have access to the spells, I agree.
Quote:
Therefore, I think with the current system, the Knight get's both Might and Magic, whereas the Wizard get's only Magic. And I think a Spell Power counter not only on duration but also strength would be a really nice way to make up for that.
I agree light magic should be a bit more dependent on spellpower. It's spells after all.
____________
open source for an open mind
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted April 13, 2007 07:43 PM |
|
|
I like your ideas, alci. Still, even wit pupper master and frenzy being affected by SP, it looks bad. Why? Because it's still a 100% reliable "stun" (you can't control the stack for the duration, if you can't dispel it, and we all know not all factions can..), moreover, it's a "stun spell" that aditionally turns your own unit against you. Compared to horribly nerfed shocking effect of lightning bolt.. wtf? Ok, lightning effect can't be dispelled, but the effect, compared to puppet master, is just pathetic. And it still got insanely nerfed...
I have no real solution for dark magic problem now.. maybe I'll think about something in the future.
|
|
ZombieLord
Promising
Famous Hero
that wants your brainz...
|
|
posted April 13, 2007 07:47 PM |
|
|
Great ideas Alc! Simply great
This will make Wizards more powerful casters than Knights, and also nerfes the effect of Light/Dark spells on huge stacks. I fully agree with them (ofc, some numbers could be changed...)
Also, I would like the mass spells cost 100% of current initiative (reset ATB to 0). The Master of... of Light/Dark spells are waaay too overpowered IMO
|
|
ChaosDragon
Famous Hero
|
|
posted April 16, 2007 07:58 AM |
|
|
|
But in the hand of warlock, they're very powerful, not to mention their damn hit and run tactic. It seems there is no possible solution, but alci ideas might be tried, if it destroy the balance of ashan, then we can revert back to the original.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted April 16, 2007 10:13 AM |
|
|
I agree, Destructive is sufficiently powerful in its current form. I think it's the other aspects of the Warlock that needs to be buffed to give him the edge and not make him need to depend on the hit'n'run tactic.
Btw. I'm just gonna make a jump here - am I the only one who feels that the fact that Dark Magic and Light Magic overwrite each other is a step back to the dark ages [sorry, Heroes 2 fans]? I'm refering to the fact that Slow will overrule Haste instead of just cancel it, and vice verca. I think that already in Heroes 3, that was fixed so that when you used opposing spells, the would cancel each other out, instead of just making the last one active - which is the way it should be: With the current system, acting first is actually a bad thing, because you can be fairly certain that the enemy will just counter your spell, leaving you with a wasted turn and an opponent with the upper hand!
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted April 16, 2007 10:19 AM |
|
|
|
It was the same way in h3, but yeah, a dispel effect would be nice; In h3, I sometimes prefered not to cast haste in fear of counter-slow ~~
|
|
ZombieLord
Promising
Famous Hero
that wants your brainz...
|
|
posted April 17, 2007 11:45 AM |
|
|
Why a dispel effect? I say: HAVE BOTH EFFECTS. Like what happens with Vulnerability/Endurace. That means you'll cast Haste (+40% initiative), and then the enemy casts Slow (-40% initiative, BUT WITH HASTE STILL APPLIED). It is just very good & fair IMO
Here's why the dispel is still NOT very fair: it does not matter the mastery of the spell. You could dispel an Expert Haste with a no mastery Slow and this is just... NOT FAIR.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted April 17, 2007 12:14 PM |
|
|
|
hey, good point
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted April 17, 2007 12:19 PM |
|
|
Yes ... I agree with that.
I had thought of (but didn't write) having it so that it was additive - so if you cast Expert Haste (+40 %) and then Basic Slow (is that -25 % or something?) then you would end up with +40 % -25 % = +15 %. Another approach, obviously, would be to make it multiplicative like you say - then it would be 1.4*0.75 = 1.05 so a 5 % increase.
EDIT > Actually, somehow I think additive would be more fair, because with multiplication, Slow would dominate Haste:
Expert Haste = +40 %
Expert Slow = -40 %
Both: 1.4 * 0.6 = 0.84, so still netto 16 % Initiative loss.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted September 14, 2007 10:01 PM |
|
Edited by Maurice at 22:05, 14 Sep 2007.
|
Quote:
moreover, it's a "stun spell" that aditionally turns your own unit against you.
Solution: have a "partial" Puppet Master indeed only give partial control over the unit. Let's say for arguments sake that with the suggestion by Alcibiades, a Hero gains control over a stack for just 60%. On the initiative bar, the unit will be shown as split, right next to eachother - but they are the same unit on the field. One will be for the unit as controlled by the enemy player, one will be for the owner of the creature stack. I would suggest to have the first "acting" of the stack be the one who has most control over it. In this case, it would be the one casting Puppet Master, not the original owner of the stack.
Whoever uses the stack uses it in effect as if the stack size was reduced to the amount of whatever the control is. In this case, the one controlling can use the stack as if its size was only 60% of what it was at the moment the Puppet Master was cast. The other player can then immediatly use it as well, but at only 40%. Percentages should be rounded to the nearest integer, so if the stack in this case would only contain 2 creatures, control would be 50/50 each. If it's only 1, then the Puppet Master gets full control in this case and the owner none at all (in which case there is no icon for him on the initiative bar either). Note that this control ratio remains the same as long as the Puppet Master lasts, even if the stack takes casualties.
To avoid "double movement", I would suggest to also reduce the creature's speed by the same amount. I.e., the Puppet Master gets to use 60% of the creature's speed in this case, and the owner 40%.
Stats like Initiative, Attack and Defense all remain unaltered.
|
|
aulfgar
Hired Hero
|
|
posted September 15, 2007 12:31 AM |
|
|
Quote:
The problem for me with Light and Dark Magic is that you can affect an infinite amount of creatures.
Well here is a suggestion that hearkens back to the dark ages. Make all spells in light and dark affect a certain number of hit points per spell power. Puppet Master used to be Hypnotize except it had a hit points limitation. This made Hypnotize not a super good spell but if you could use it on say 900 Arch Devils with a spell power of 6 its just as broken.
Now we could limit the buff and debuff spells such as Divine Strength to tiers 1-3 with no skill and for each skill level in the appropriate school it goes one tier higher. With this solution the effect should be a static effect such as say 15% more initiative or perhaps a solid 1 initiative bonus, to help out those poor zombies.
The mass effects in addition to costing more should use up two rounds of initiative instead of .5. The reason is this, you should not get more for your turn and less time doing it because of buffing all of your critters or cursing all of your opponents, logically it should take more time not less.
____________
|
|
godlyatheist
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 15, 2007 02:13 AM |
|
|
Can we also use sp as a checkpoint for when the hero can use the spell?
Like
Lv1 -- 1 sp Mass 3 sp
Lv2 -- 3 sp Mass 5 sp
Lv3 -- 5 sp Mass 7 sp
Lv4 -- 7 sp
Lv5 -- 9 sp
This way a might hero can't start spamming mass spells in the first two weeks. It can still learn it depending on mastery of Light/Dark, but not use it. Of course necro heroes won't have too much problem with this.
|
|
Moonlith
Bad-mannered
Supreme Hero
If all else fails, use Fiyah!
|
|
posted November 13, 2007 01:47 AM |
|
Edited by Moonlith at 01:51, 13 Nov 2007.
|
I just noticed this:
Light works best if you have a large army (where-as it is nearly useless when you have a weak army) and Dark magic is more effective if your opponent's army is large.
Sooo basicly, Light magic is effective when you are ALREADY overpowered, and weaker in effect when you are already underpowered. Obvious solution: Switch that around.
Now for Light Magic I was thinking: What about boosting the Light Magic effects to make it far more usefull early game, while setting it up that its effect in fact DECREASE when your own army strength (compared to the opponent army strength) is already far greater? As in, the stronger your army is compared to the opponent, the weaker your light magic spell effects.
Problem solving? Probably. Realistic or logical? Not at all.
And yeah, a simular approach to Dark Magic. Decreased effects when they affect more creatures.
Pretty much the same as Alc claimed, except there needs to be a way that Light Magic is as well more effective early game.
Godlyatheist: I like your suggestion as well, but that would even further hinder a Knight in early game creeping. It's end game (when he has 10+ SP) thats the problem, and where Light Magic is imbalanced. Same with Dark.
|
|
GenieLord
Honorable
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted November 13, 2007 02:47 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I'm still not sure if it's necessary to change Light&Dark. I'm not saying the balance between the spell scholls is perfect now, but it's not really that bad and I just fear that such a change could easily make things worse...
Well, I think it's pretty bad, actually. Have you ever tried to play a game without Light and Dark magic? I made the mistake of not picking Light Magic in the Sylvan campaign recently [tried for Nature's Luck], and Dark Magic completely pawned me. The ballance between Light and Dark right now is fine, but without any of them, you're in serious trouble.
I used Destructive Magic in the Sylvan campaign, and it actually worked great.
It depends on what you invest and the kind of the hero; heroes with high Spell Power may use Summoning and Destructive (Wizard, Warlock, Necro...). It will work for them better.
In my opinion, Wizards are much better with Summoning Magic than with Light Magic. Also, Golems and Titans are immune to mind control spells (which are most of the strong Dark Spells), and the Mage has Cleansing spells, so Dark Spells are less effective.
Light and Dark Magics work well also without so much Spell Power, that's their advantage. They are not so much better...
|
|
Asheron
Famous Hero
Ancient
|
|
posted November 13, 2007 03:10 AM |
|
|
Maybe I'm not an expert,but here is something that could balance spells, it's simple and IMHO effective - raise the spell price!
This way might heroes cannot abuse Light nor Dark,there has to be difference between Might & Magic.And only true spell users would go for destructive due to the high price...
What do you think?
____________
|
|
Radox
Known Hero
|
|
posted November 13, 2007 06:19 AM |
|
|
What about the balance of Destructive magic? It is so crappy it cannot get worse! Lightning bolt is UTTER garbage. I prefer using Magic arrow instead of this spell.
But more importantly, all the Destructive spells become completely useless in late game when the armies have grown considerably. For example, if your enemy has 300 Pit Lords, what's the purpose of using Implosion to kill 4-5 of them? You better use Frenzy...
|
|
Nirual
Famous Hero
Imbued Ballista
|
|
posted November 13, 2007 08:01 AM |
|
|
Thats pretty much the point here. Destructive is only good for rushing or possibly hit&run, whereas Light&Dark scale well if growing army sizes (Summoning is somewhere inbetween).
I like the general idea shown here, but while that somewhat evens the field between the magic schools, it also puts them down to being relatively worthless in endgame (when the armies grow faster than heroes gain more SP through levels).
I suppose the best way to improve the scaling of spells would be to add a secondary factor depending on the hero level (except for Conjure Phoenix, which already takes that into consideration).
____________
In ur base killing ur doods... and raising them as undeads.
|
| |
|
|
