Caster of Magic Release thread : latest version 6.06!

[Seravy]

Talking about missile immunity maybe it is good merit to make flame blade pierce it? Is this possible? Or maybe it should work like defense 50 instead of absolute immunity.

Not possible for Flame Blade.
It already worked as 50 defense to begin with although I modified that to 100 (all immunities use this same value not just missile)

Another solution is to make Guardian wind/Missile immunity to act as +4 to ranged def(or -4 to hit) if possible. It would actually carry the meaning of wind distorting arrows like invisibility and blur apply. It should work exactly the same on lower defense, attack and to hit bonuses. Right?

Nope, both would be entirely different. +4 to defend would do nothing like immunity unless the unit already had at least like half as many shields as the attack strength. -4 to hit is not possible, the minimum hit rate is 10% so it would just do what -2 to hit does unless the unit had extra hit.
Doesn't matter, I'm happy with both Guardian Wind and Warp Wood, as all high end units (except this champion) do not use arrow attacks, they either have boulder or magic. No need to change an entire game mechanic for one unit. Changing the unit is better (and is why it was magic attack to being with).

Thinking about it a bit more, why exactly is magical less good against fantastic creatures? Sky Drake has magic immunity, yes. None of the others do, nor do they have any ability that would reduce magical damage (aside from Behemoth's Elemental Armor.)
on the other hand, Efreets cast Warp Wood, Djinn cast Guardian Wind, Storm Giants, Demons and Demon Lords are missile immune, and everything else, although not immune, takes less damage due to the range penalty, unless you are close enough. So that's about one and a half cases where magic is worse and arrows are worse in all others.
Or is there something I do not know about? (The bow does grant all the stats and abilities as though the attack was an arrow attack so that isn't affected.)
I guess leadership, flame blade, and holy/eldritch weapon are valid, on the other hand magic gets buffed by Focus Magic, and allows the hero to have Arcane Power.
I'm tempted to restore the magic attack but keep the Capacity at the moment, but will think more about it.

AEther Master - I think base 8SP is way too much. This is way too beneficial especially early in the game. This is more valuable than the same amount of points in research IMO(i.e. Sage Master). It's just too much. 3-4SP/level might be more sensible.

I intentionally made this one high because skill costs increase exponentially, so the higher the bonus, the less valuable it is. Eventually you'll need hundreds of points for a single point of casting skill. I will need to find a hero with this early to be able to test.

Battlemage - I find this one to be weak. Maybe if it could also add +1 ranged attacks number up to the maximum of the hero it would be more versatile. So the hero could engage in melee and recharge his/her used ranged attacks.

That would be very annoying because you can't select if you want to use the melee or the ranged attack. The hero would keep switching between them every other turn.

Soul linker - I think it should be flat bonus because it makes sense to use it earlier in game and you can't and it looks a bit ridiculous later http://prntscr.com/aehmzl maybe same bonus as luck for fantastic creatures is powerful enough or even flat +1 to hit and +1 to def.

This ability is meant to encourage late game use of fantastic creatures mostly. Yes, +3 to DEF and to HIT is awesome, in fact it effectively doubles the defense power of the creature and boosts damage by about half, but you do need a high level Soul Linker hero for that (and it takes away from extra stats the hero could have gotten for itself to level up better), and both mana and casting skill to maintain an army of summoned creatures.
I will need to test it more, in the only game I had it, I would have won even if my Sky Drakes didn't have any stat boost.

[Drax]

Some comments on races follow. It' a long list in that other thread and takes time to digest I assume you'd prefer comments here.

Barbarians - I think berserkes should have higher resistance. This race to me is not at all competitive against AI at any difficulty above normal.

Gnolls - I don't have much experience. Seem ok from what I've seen.

Lizardmen - I think they are OK playable.

Halflings - Playable.

Klackon - I never play them. seem OK though. You can win with them. though boring.

High Men - I dislike the -2 resistance. Makes their basic units terrible against anything that sneezes magic and is not applied to high end units. So with AI spamming sprites, nagas and hellhounds that's pretty bad. Then the Magicians with general spellcasting are OP. Paladins are generally ok. Illusion immunity makes them a bit too OP against phantom units and nightblades.

High Elves - I think they are OK. I think Pegasai are good as they are.

Nomads - they are Ok. I like playing them. They have good variety of units.

Orcs - well now they have OP Magicians too(4fig though). Generally not a bad race. I think they are playable.

---

Trolls - They are powerful. For war mamoths I'd make them even more expensive and with +1todef and +1 resistance.

Draconians - they are ok. Have some serious advantages but not really OP.

Dwarfs - they are ok.

Dark Elf - well they are Ok. Nightblades 2 health per figure is my recomendation. Withouth change to price. Warlocks seem ok.

Beastmen - I haven't played them recently but they are pretty good in just about every way.

Now on arcanus vs. mirran races. I think there is big disbalance right now. It is a 2point cost retort. Which means it's generally always better to go for mirran with current discrepance between races. And with AI breaching towers like nothing this makes a human player at big disadvantage if they choose to play arcanus. Basically everyone else will have resource bonuses and better races. It seems to me that the discrepancy is way too big. Resistance nerfs of arcanus seem to be the problem. It's too much. AI will hammer you with magic very early and there is nothing you can do. Lower growth rate of better races is rarely noticeable and they all have great low level units so they don't really need big cities to expand.

[Seravy]

Makes their basic units terrible against anything that sneezes magic and is not applied to high end units. So with AI spamming sprites, nagas and hellhounds that's pretty bad.

Resistance has no effect against Sprites and Hell Hounds. It only works against the poison on Nagas.

Lizardmen - I think they are OK playable.

Agreed, I finished one game with them meanwhile and they were great.

I have to test the other races more. I consider making Nomads a race with high resistance. I also plan to boost resistance of Priests (all races). Removing the extra resistance from Beastmen and maybe Draconian could also help.

[Drax]

It already worked as 50 defense to begin with although I modified that to 100 (all immunities use this same value not just missile)

I see. that explains a lot. Why would you change the 50 value? It seemed to work well.

Nope, both would be entirely different. +4 to defend would do nothing like immunity unless the unit already had at least like half as many shields as the attack strength. -4 to hit is not possible, the minimum hit rate is 10% so it would just do what -2 to hit does unless the unit had extra hit.

My idea was to make the absolute to hit chance to -1(to compensate for basic +1hit bonuses) for most cases and thus to be the nature of this immunity. if it's hardcoded to be at least 1 and you can't change that then it won't work. was worth thinking about it though

Doesn't matter, I'm happy with both Guardian Wind and Warp Wood, as all high end units (except this champion) do not use arrow attacks, they either have boulder or magic. No need to change an entire game mechanic for one unit. Changing the unit is better (and is why it was magic attack to being with).

There are plenty of bow units including 4? champions. And there are plenty of buff spells that are hard negated by this hard immunities. And in a relative world hard immunities do not exist Same as weapon immunity it doesn't make you impervious to melee...

Thinking about it a bit more, why exactly is magical less good against fantastic creatures?

Because nearly ALL(except Gargoyles only?) fantastic creatures have less defense than resistance and you can buff(alchemist guild) arrow attacks unlike magic attacks. You can far easier kill most fantastic creatures(Fire elemental, Phantom beast, Sprites, hell hounds, earth elementals) with arrows than with magic attacks or spells. You're correct that some high level fantastic creatures are hard immune right now, but that is a result of the immunity change 50->100. They were killable before albeit not easy targets. Overall though you would not fight the top level units most of the time and also the quick combat the AI uses to fight dungeons ignores immunities... which adds insult to injury

I guess leadership, flame blade, and holy/eldritch weapon are valid, on the other hand magic gets buffed by Focus Magic, and allows the hero to have Arcane Power.

I think that too much emphasis on magic attacks make the game less diverse. You have less incentive to use these spells in CoM than in vanilla. Which leads to devaluation of armor buff spells also since they don't help with magic attacks.

AEther Master -
I intentionally made this one high because skill costs increase exponentially, so the higher the bonus, the less valuable it is. Eventually you'll need hundreds of points for a single point of casting skill. I will need to find a hero with this early to be able to test.

Well the skill costs that increase exponentially are to be paid regardless the source and you need to spend MP on it. 90% of the time 8SP=8MP as you would be spending MP to increase skill. It is far more valuable than research points given by sage and this is enough of a reason to be too much with a base of 8.
As an example the Archmage retort gives you 50% bonus to MP->SP conversion(+10skill which is irrelevant after begining). And this ability gives you DOUBLE the amount of MP in Ritual Master... so this hero is double archmage?

That would be very annoying because you can't select if you want to use the melee or the ranged attack. The hero would keep switching between them every other turn.

Yes that's annoying. Good point. Still a weak ability though.

Soul linker -
This ability is meant to encourage late game use of fantastic creatures mostly. Yes, +3 to DEF and to HIT is awesome, in fact it effectively doubles the defense power of the creature and boosts damage by about half, but you do need a high level Soul Linker hero for that (and it takes away from extra stats the hero could have gotten for itself to level up better), and both mana and casting skill to maintain an army of summoned creatures.
I will need to test it more, in the only game I had it, I would have won even if my Sky Drakes didn't have any stat boost.

Well some of the high level fantastic creatures now give you MP so you actually can make a free army which this ability can make unkillable. Think demon lord summoning demons with +4/+4 and +7 to hit ranged attacks... Or think about it with shadowdemons... or even ghouls..
Also there is absolutely no case where I would want soul linker* on any of my heroes as it is now. It has negative value over normal soul linker as it uses up an extra skill point.

[Drax]

Resistance has no effect against Sprites and Hell Hounds. It only works against the poison on Nagas.

Doesn't ranged magic and breath attack use resistance in the same way shields are used for normal attacks?

I have based some of my previous comments on this premise...

[Seravy]

fantastic creatures have less defense than resistance

This explains a lot. You assume resistance is a magic defense stat, like in most games.
It isn't. Both arrows and magical ranged attacks are reduced by the normal defense stat.

Resistance gives your unit a chance to not get affected by instant death, petrification, poison, and other "save or die", "save or take damage", "save or get cursed" effects. It's resistance against status effects, not damage.

[Seravy]

s an example the Archmage retort gives you 50% bonus to MP->SP conversion(+10skill which is irrelevant after begining). And this ability gives you DOUBLE the amount of MP in Ritual Master... so this hero is double archmage?

Mana Focusing is 33% more mana and +8 mana. (original game it was 25% without a +8)
Archmage is 50% and a +10, and this was the same in the original game and even gave an additional effect (spells resist dispelling).

Mana is a resource you can use in many ways, giving you options on how to spend it (you can even convert it to gold and buy buildings!). Skill is not, it merely allows you to cast more spells and you still need mana for them.
While they are equal in a situation where you would spend on both anyway, there are plenty of times when you would not spend on skill at all, and AEther Master does not give you the option to get mana for it in that case. If you urgently need 3 more Hell Hounds to defend your capital against a stack coming your way, producing mana will help you doing that. Producing skill won't.

[Drax]

fantastic creatures have less defense than resistance

This explains a lot. You assume resistance is a magic defense stat, like in most games.
It isn't. Both arrows and magical ranged attacks are reduced by the normal defense stat.

Resistance gives your unit a chance to not get affected by instant death, petrification, poison, and other "save or die", "save or take damage", "save or get cursed" effects. It's resistance against status effects, not damage.

I see. However my claim that you can easier take on fantastic units with bows stays. It's due to buffs then why it worked like that and fantastic units are more resistant to spells so you would concentrate on attacks anyway.

Regardless the effect is the same and my point is the same: Ranged units are better than magic shooters in many cases.

s an example the Archmage retort gives you 50% bonus to MP->SP conversion(+10skill which is irrelevant after begining). And this ability gives you DOUBLE the amount of MP in Ritual Master... so this hero is double archmage?

Mana Focusing is 33% more mana and +8 mana. (original game it was 25% without a +8)
Archmage is 50% and a +10, and this was the same in the original game and even gave an additional effect (spells resist dispelling).

By MP I meant magic power(like Ritual Master) not mana. My point with archmage was that +50% on SP is valuable and you gave +100% over "ritual master" base to "Aether master" thus the "double archmage" expression.

I'll repeat - 90% of the time 8SP=8Magic power. Thus this ability is twice as good as ritual master 90% of the time. It's too much really. The loss of versatility is irrelevant you will always be spending on SP.

I think the base for ritual master should be 3 and for aether master 4(which is 33% more). I have not received them on a single hero yet. But imagine the sage with these on turn 20

[Seravy]

The loss of versatility is irrelevant you will always be spending on SP.

False, I spend 0 on skill quite frequently. Depends on the strategy you play I guess. I tend to spend on one thing at a time for as long as necessary to achieve my goal (researching a spell, fueling spellcasting with mana, reaching a certain amount of casting skill) and only get all 3 if I don't particularly need any of them more than the other.
I'll consider adjusting the numbers, but have to play more to be able to decide.

It's due to buffs then why it worked

Buffs benefit multi-figure ranged attackers a lot. Single figure heroes, not so much.

Let's assume the hero has 15 bow attack and +3 to hit, and -1 range penalty.
this yields an average of 15*0.5=7.5 damage.
Cast Holy Weapon and Flame Blade, 17 attack, +4 to hit.
damage is 17*0.6=10.2 damage.

With a magical attack of the same stats, we get 15*0.6=9 damage. If we have Focus Magic on the same hero, it's 18*0.6=10.8 damage. So we get more damage with 1 buff than with 2 in the other case, and it's also a lot better if not buffed.
Buffed bow attacks are only better if the hero can afford to stay close to the monster and not suffer any range penalty.

Furthermore, the hero can get arcane power for up to an extra 9 magical ranged attack randomly from her 3 skill picks, whereas there is no such ability for arrows.

Also, there are no other bow champions. Only bow heroes. The Elven Archer is the only bow champion in the game, all others are magic or melee.

I think that too much emphasis on magic attacks make the game less diverse.

While magic attacks work better against monsters, against wizards, this is not so obvious.
Depending on element, Bless, Resist Elements, Elemental Armor or all 3 will reduce the damage, evening out the odds with missile immunity, and then there is also Magic Immunity, so it's 4 spells against magic damage while there are 2 against missiles.

[Drax]

False, I spend 0 on skill quite frequently. Depends on the strategy you play I guess. I tend to spend on one thing at a time for as long as necessary to achieve my goal (researching a spell, fueling spellcasting with mana, reaching a certain amount of casting skill) and only get all 3 if I don't particularly need any of them more than the other.

So do I, but the fact is the same. If you had the same hero with Aether Master(8) or Ritual Master(4) the first has double the skill value of the second.

I'll consider adjusting the numbers, but have to play more to be able to decide.

That's all I asked

With a magical attack of the same stats, we get 15*0.6=9 damage. If we have Focus Magic on the same hero, it's 18*0.6=10.8 damage. So we get more damage with 1 buff than with 2 in the other case, and it's also a lot better if not buffed.

not true. I'm pretty sure you included a +1tohit in this example which you don't have with focus magic.