|
| Thread: Death of the Spellcaster? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
Lesij
Famous Hero
|
posted June 03, 2007 07:33 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Otherwise it's the same as using 2 stacks of master hunters instead of 1 of hunters and 1 of druid (since both are shooters). 
No it isn't cuz then you have more shooters, than if you split up your Hunters 
Moreover, there will be thet Power Feed-Thingy...
Sh*ttty just can't w8 to chceck what those specials do 
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted June 03, 2007 08:52 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
This would put an end to all whining about spellcasters being underpowered in late game.
I don't think so, because I want spells in endgame.
Otherwise it's the same as using 2 stacks of master hunters instead of 1 of hunters and 1 of druid (since both are shooters).
hunters can't cast endurance.
I think you mess up things, guys. First of all, the only casters that suffers from nonlinear spellpower are the offensive ones.. and how many of them are strictly offensive? Pit lords, which can be used as melee units.. Arch mages, which are better at cleansing/buffing.. and druids, which are great with their expert endurance spell and strong with their lightning bolts even in endgame, taking the def-bypassing nature of the magical attack into consideration? (magma dragon killer..)
I don't see casters underpowered. The logarythmic formula is perfectly ok. It's the linear one which would be bad, because i'd instantly turn elder druids into the strongest unit in the game (just see how much a single druid does.. >_> , and pit lords into some AoE imba spawns. No thanks.
Linear formula would not benefit auxiliary casters, too (like inquisitors).
|
|
dschingi
Famous Hero
the guy with the dragon golem
|
|
posted June 03, 2007 08:58 PM |
|
Edited by dschingi at 20:59, 03 Jun 2007.
|
Quote:
The logarythmic formula is perfectly ok. It's the linear one which would be bad, because i'd instantly turn elder druids into the strongest unit in the game (just see how much a single druid does.. >_>, and pit lords into some AoE imba spawns. No thanks.
depends on how much spellpower each of them adds (i mean if it was linear)
____________
open source for an open mind
|
|
dreddy
Hired Hero
HC frosh
|
|
posted June 03, 2007 09:36 PM |
|
|
Quote:
hunters can't cast endurance.
He might've been referring to their 'Warding Arrows' special which triggers sometimes, and it is wise sometimes to split'em up to ensure it does so more frequently.
Quote:
I think you mess up things, guys. First of all, the only casters that suffers from nonlinear spellpower are the offensive ones.. and how many of them are strictly offensive? Pit lords, which can be used as melee units.. Arch mages, which are better at cleansing/buffing.. and druids, which are great with their expert endurance spell and strong with their lightning bolts even in endgame, taking the def-bypassing nature of the magical attack into consideration? (magma dragon killer..)
Good one. I can only add that THE ONLY EFFICIENT USE I've seen for Pit Lords so far (used both by/against me) is their combo with Tele Assault.
Pit Lord: say hello to my lil' friend *pull out the Vorpal Sword*
____________
“... so when the devil wants to dance with you, you’d better say “never”, because the dance with the devil might last you forever.” /Immortal Technique/
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted June 03, 2007 09:58 PM |
|
|
Sorry for off-topic. But doen't anyone else find Pit Lords great Siege weapons? Whether you are attacking or defending, sieges tend to last (somewhat equal armies). That is excactly when Pit Lords shine, because they have time to gate reinforcements (even inside the castle, if opponent is turtling high level creatures). In a field combat, you want most of the action to happen in first rounds. In sieges that would be ideal (if attackin) but rarely possible.
And once you have twise as many Pit Lords (that means 4 stacks), they are a decisive factor in the battle. Both Vorpal Sword and Casting benefit greattly from number of stacks, not of the amount of creatures in those stacks. Thus gating boosts them immensly - therefore they are my Siege weapons.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted June 03, 2007 11:16 PM |
|
|
Pit lords are much better as castle defenders/attackers, yeah. But! Those massive clustered stacks of demonlords just BEG for one well aimed lucky empowered meteorshower.. 
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted June 04, 2007 02:04 AM |
|
Edited by Minion at 02:30, 04 Jun 2007.
|
Lol, I think you see everything in the game begging for lucky empowered spells But sieges do have the advantage that there is much more room to place your units, Meteor Shower is deadly for sure, but deadlier it is in normal and smaller battlefield. And there Pit Lords don't shine without TA, and the splitting is limited which you would want to do to gain most of their abilities. And actually considering if Pit Lords are targeted by spells that is great; because out of Inferno's units Pit Lords are the ones that can endure most (weekly HP 480!)
|
|
Plexus22
Known Hero
|
|
posted June 04, 2007 02:59 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
The spellcaster units I believe are going to be the most strongly effected by the change. Some melee units are faster, slower, offensive, defensive. Shooters have different abilities, but they all play the same as before and similar strategies will be used (pick an upgrade, get a lot of them). With spellcasters everything is different, why mass them?
Ha ha I just had to use that one. Anyway, I actually think this is a good point, which once again emphaszes why the logarithmic Spell Power growth for units needs to have a go in favor of a linear one! If you are don't know what I'm refering to here, you can see a rather lengthy discussion in this thread atma6.
If casters spell damage was linear they would be overpowered. Lets take the basic mage for example (non upgraded) does 32 damage via fist of wrath per mage. Now a tiny little stack of 5 (one weeks growth) would do a guaranteed 160 damage per turn (and its not effected by magic proof, immunity, resistance, defense stat, etc) plus they can cast it 3 times giving them a total of 480 damage in the first 3 rounds! And they are only lvl 4 units...imagine what an endgame stack of like 30 archmages would do per turn with that fireball. The fist of wrath spell alone would be like casting implosion on the target and archmages can cast it 5 times 
|
|
PhoenixReborn
Promising
Legendary Hero
Unicorn
|
|
posted June 04, 2007 04:31 AM |
|
|
|
Sure Plexus, but the damage numbers could change too...
|
|
plexus22
Known Hero
|
|
posted June 04, 2007 07:33 AM |
|
|
|
True, but that kindof defeats the purpose of having a linear system and also devalues the usefulness of the individual units as casters. Then they would maybe become more useful in large numbers but be basically inefective in low numbers which is very bad for a unit like a mage that has low hitpoints, not durable at all and is really only valuable for its casting ability. I agree though, that formula needs to be tweaked so that it deals more damage in large numbers but not to a linear extreme.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted June 04, 2007 11:02 AM |
|
|
Quote:
If casters spell damage was linear they would be overpowered. Lets take the basic mage for example (non upgraded) does 32 damage via fist of wrath per mage. Now a tiny little stack of 5 (one weeks growth) would do a guaranteed 160 damage per turn (and its not effected by magic proof, immunity, resistance, defense stat, etc) plus they can cast it 3 times giving them a total of 480 damage in the first 3 rounds! And they are only lvl 4 units...imagine what an endgame stack of like 30 archmages would do per turn with that fireball. The fist of wrath spell alone would be like casting implosion on the target and archmages can cast it 5 times
exactly my point, and nerfing the damage produces the same effect we have now: the mages are good against high-def creatures because of their low real hp (not effective hp).
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted June 04, 2007 05:11 PM |
|
|
Quote:
If casters spell damage was linear they would be overpowered. Lets take the basic mage for example (non upgraded) does 32 damage via fist of wrath per mage. Now a tiny little stack of 5 (one weeks growth) would do a guaranteed 160 damage per turn (and its not effected by magic proof, immunity, resistance, defense stat, etc) plus they can cast it 3 times giving them a total of 480 damage in the first 3 rounds! And they are only lvl 4 units...imagine what an endgame stack of like 30 archmages would do per turn with that fireball. The fist of wrath spell alone would be like casting implosion on the target and archmages can cast it 5 times
No, no and no - that is plain wrong! The problem does not lie with the linear Spell Power, quite on the contrary, the Logarithmic Formula is broken when you have very small stacks - especially with only one creature in the stack, where the mage will do 32 damage! My suggestion is that stack Spell Power will be 0.5 x Numbers for Mages [see here to read further] - I'm not saying this number is perfect, maybe it should be 0.6, maybe 0.4, but let's just stick to that for a moment. For stacks of 1-10 mages, the below compares the stack spell power with the current system to my suggestion:
Mages Current SP Linear SP
1 1 0.5
2 2 1.0
3 3 1.5
4 4 2.0
5 5 2.5
6 6 3.0
7 6 3.5
8 7 4.0
9 8 4.5
10 9 5.0
...
32 16 16
As you can see, for stacks smaller than 32 Mages (with multiplier of 0.5), the Logarithmic Formula yields higher damage than what I suggest. On the other hand, with stacks larger than 32, the Linear Formula will yield the greater values (thus ensuring long term benefit of spell casting ability).
Currently, a stack of 5 mages yield 60 damage. My suggestion would reduce this to 45 damage - not increase it to 160!
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
|
posted June 04, 2007 07:37 PM |
|
|
I agree fully with upper post. 
____________
Understanding is a three-edged sword.
|
|
Plexus22
Known Hero
|
|
posted June 05, 2007 01:45 AM |
|
|
Quote:
No, no and no - that is plain wrong! The problem does not lie with the linear Spell Power, quite on the contrary, the Logarithmic Formula is broken when you have very small stacks - especially with only one creature in the stack, where the mage will do 32 damage! My suggestion is that stack Spell Power will be 0.5 x Numbers for Mages [see here to read further] - I'm not saying this number is perfect, maybe it should be 0.6, maybe 0.4, but let's just stick to that for a moment. For stacks of 1-10 mages, the below compares the stack spell power with the current system to my suggestion:
Mages Current SP Linear SP
1 1 0.5
2 2 1.0
3 3 1.5
4 4 2.0
5 5 2.5
6 6 3.0
7 6 3.5
8 7 4.0
9 8 4.5
10 9 5.0
...
32 16 16
As you can see, for stacks smaller than 32 Mages (with multiplier of 0.5), the Logarithmic Formula yields higher damage than what I suggest. On the other hand, with stacks larger than 32, the Linear Formula will yield the greater values (thus ensuring long term benefit of spell casting ability).
Currently, a stack of 5 mages yield 60 damage. My suggestion would reduce this to 45 damage - not increase it to 160!
Ok, well we are talking about different things then, I was talking about if the damage itself was linear not spellpower. But I dont think your system is good either bucause that really nerfs the value of casters in low numbers. For a unit like mage the only reason to use them in low numbers is because they can deal decent damage with spells otherwise with their low shooting damage, small hitpoints, and generally poor surviveability you wouldnt even want to take them into battle. For a unit like a druid it wouldnt bee so bad because they at least have some hitpoints like they should as a lvl 4 unit and can serve in other ways like blocking hunters especially if theres a first aid tent to keep them healthy. Also concerning mages/archmages there comes a point well below 32 at which their regular shooting attack is more damaging than their spells anyway especially when targeting low lvl units not to mention several of them in the same line of fire. So in high numbers their damage from spells is better used on tier 6 and 7 units where defense stat is ignored. I agree that something should be done with the formula to prevent it from basically plateuing at a certain point but that doesnt nerf them at low numbers.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted June 05, 2007 08:15 AM |
|
|
|
it should be logarythmical, eventually less radical to make the spells stronger in endgame, IMO.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted June 05, 2007 10:28 AM |
|
|
Quote:
it should be logarythmical, eventually less radical to make the spells stronger in endgame, IMO.
I'm not sure I understand you right here - you want a logarithmic version with slower growth in the beginning and higher numers in the end?
(Isn't that just the linear growth?  )
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted June 05, 2007 10:33 AM |
|
|
|
I'd like to see not strictly linear, but not entirely a logarythmic formula Something between them would fit well.
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted June 05, 2007 10:35 AM |
|
Edited by Minion at 10:35, 05 Jun 2007.
|
|
I'm so with Doomforge on this one.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted June 05, 2007 10:38 AM |
|
|
He he I get it. You should be aware that with a linear spellpower growth, the damage will not grow linearly, because the bonus damage will dominate when stacks are low in numbers.
____________
What will happen now?
|
| |
|
|
