Artificier strategy

[Arnuz]

Sure, but once you have 2N and 2D, (for life 1 is enough to start with some random buffs - you're not going to be able to cast them all anyhow, and you soon get most of the common spells by trading) and one or two important retorts, then there's nothing better than a spell that is so flexible that it can pump: damage on all ranged units, mana on casters (undead angel with FM is amazing), breath attacks, and even make the special abilities ranged... This last one is not the important part, it's just the icing on the cake. Spellcasting heroes, found in troves in the lairs for free, get so much out of it, it's amazing.

Enough with FM, back on topic B) in my last ghoul game I've almost defeated the life wizard, and I've started shifting to hero strategy as he's got slingers and halfling magicians so the ghouls don't work anymore. I've not found hydras or other cool stuff in this game, and as I'm at war I haven't had any possibility to get the djinn tower yet. (Speaking of djinns - I think that the trick is to attack with a hero, then the djinns target the hero first. I haven't ever had dispelling wave cast, and magic immunity only once)

So what I noticed is this: to attack with the heroes at a not-so-early phase (05-06), when one hasn't found so much stuff yet - I've cleared maybe 2/3 of the nodes and lairs of arcanus, I'm doing this:
1. shuffling items around continuously: it'll be unlikely that a lot of powerful combinations are found, maybe 1 full gear, so one needs to give it to different heroes in different places
2. accumulating defence coming from different buffs as usual

Note that this is a heroes+troop strategy. It's lunatic, so a single stack of heroes isn't going to cut it. Splitting the stack allows to be quicker. #1 wouldn't work with a single stack, as all the heroes work together, but that's actually self-harming as it slows the strategy by far.

So for #1, I think that the cost of shuffling items remotely could be tinkered with. I'd suggest making it a function of the cost of the items. It could even decrease from the current fixed 20 for very cheap items.

For #2, I've noticed that the worst offenders in terms of accumulated shields are not actually the buffs, but something else: weapon and jewel magic items. While armors giving shields is pretty normal, the issue arises when also a sword and a jewel granting shields is found. Then the hero becomes undamageable way too quickly, and abusing #1 as well, with a single item set where each item gives 2-3 shields, all of your heroes are virtually undamageable. So, I would suggest either preventing the shields on jewels and weapons, or greatly increasing their cost.

Done that, perhaps artificer could actually be buffed, and heroes perhaps found earlier.

[Seravy]

So, I would suggest either preventing the shields on jewels and weapons, or greatly increasing their cost.

That would make heroes who can't equip an armor (almost) unplayable.

Accessories have already been limited to at most 4 shields instead of 6 and I don't want to go lower.

Besides nothing we do about hero defense will allow heroes to come earlier. Abilities like Noble, Sage, Ritual Master, etc are also things that break game balance if found too early.

[Arnuz]

Well, you started this thread with "maybe we overnerfed artificers", so I'm trying to find ways to make the crafting of items relevant at high difficulties without breaking the game. By increasing the cost I mean, increasing the cost of defence bonus, which in MoM was double on jewelry (did this change in Com?). You could make it, say, 3x on weapons/staves and 4x on jewelry (to account for the 2 slots on mages). I don't think that'd make them unplayable - it'd just make it more difficult to find the perfect item set, as weapons and jewels would have lower shield defence boni. Besides, mages being squishy is a staple of all things fantasy! They can deal with neutrals and lairs/nodes, but they should be at risk when facing a chaos wizard...

Then making create item and artifact cheaper to cast would be possible with less balance worries. Having a hard limit is not the same - 4+4+6 and your hero is unkillable, make those 4 hard to find or expensive to create and that's not an issue anymore. Make it necessary to craft items for all heroes (by making item transfers more expensive) and that's even more the case.

To summaries, unsolved issues:
- crafting irrelevant for its cost
- famous irrelevant as it's easier to find heroes in lairs anyhow

Wild, crazy idea. What if crafting wasn't a spell - or in other words, what if it didn't cost time and overland skill, but only mana?
Similar - what if artificer didn't reduce mana cost but had a way higher skill reduction? (artificer: crafting at 10x skill power, or something)

Defense already has diminishing returns,

x Want to know more

[Seravy]

By increasing the cost I mean, increasing the cost of defence bonus, which in MoM was double on jewelry (did this change in Com?)

Yes.  It wasn't just defense, it was all stats. This made crafting accessories unreasonably expensive which might be more balanced but from the player's viewpoint it's unacceptable - items for the most common slot type cost double, for no apparent reason. If anything this made item crafting a poor strategy, especially as found accessories didn't have this penalty if I remember well.

You could make it, say, 3x on weapons/staves and 4x on jewelry (to account for the 2 slots on mages).

At that cost you'll never craft +Def items again except armor, and will instead put Elemental Armor, Invulnerability, Lionheart and Divine Protection on your caster heroes to raise their durability. Which cost as much as +2 def with the multiplier but are worth as much as 5 or 6.
Armor has half the defense anyway, it goes up to 8 while other items are 4. (Staves are 6 but then you usually have no armor...)

famous irrelevant as it's easier to find heroes in lairs anyhow

Famous grants levels to heroes. Sure, that's still untested to see how powerful it is, but calling it irrelevant now is a bit early. Besides, it also doubles your chances of buying items and quadruples mercenaries.

Similar - what if artificer didn't reduce mana cost but had a way higher skill reduction?

Good idea but not doable.

What if crafting wasn't a spell - or in other words, what if it didn't cost time and overland skill, but only mana?

Then you could have perfect items instantly and the AI gets no chance to spell blast it. It would be the same as buying items from the merchant except you could pick what you want making the merchant pointless. Horrible idea.

I'm pretty sure we reduced crafting costs a few days ago so how is that still a problem? My problem was the book requirements for the useful item powers and...not having heroes to equip and creatures to summon while I wait for heroes, all of which already solved by changing the item power costs to make sure the viable strategies don't cost more than 12 picks total, including the need for a summoning spell while heroes are absent.

[Arnuz]

I'm just throwing ideas, as a newcomer I'm not aware of all the discussion that went on so I'll need some repetition, sorry about that. Yes, irrelevant: finding a hero in a lair 20 turns before also gives you an additional level (if not many more) 20 turns down the line, so a quick starting strategy is equivalent to having the famous retort (if not better). Likewise, finding a decent item for free is much better than crafting your own in a lot of turns, with a lot of mana and skill investment: so artificer is irrelevant. Basically, starting fast gives you all the benefits of these retorts. What these retorts should strive for instead, is offering something that can be combined with found stuff. How about: famous -> saviour, additional likelihood of finding prisoner heroes? And, artificer lets you melt items for an equal skill bonus to mana?

Yes. It wasn't just defense, it was all stats. This made crafting accessories unreasonably expensive which might be more balanced but from the player's viewpoint it's unacceptable - items for the most common slot type cost double, for no apparent reason. If anything this made item crafting a poor strategy, especially as found accessories didn't have this penalty if I remember well.

OK. Well, would you consider rolling back the change if this turned out to be what makes the hero strategy imbalanced? If it's off the table, then it's off the table and I won't suggest it again.
Another issue is the found items. Can you change the item creation procedure? If that's not possible then the endeavour of balancing items... Is frankly hopeless ^_^'

At that cost you'll never craft +Def items again except armor, and will instead put Elemental Armor, Invulnerability, Lionheart and Divine Protection on your caster heroes to raise their durability. Which cost as much as +2 def with the multiplier but are worth as much as 5 or 6.
Armor has half the defense anyway, it goes up to 8 while other items are 4. (Staves are 6 but then you usually have no armor...)

Well, making defence less likely to find is the core of my idea. Crafting it takes a lot of time, I wouldn't consider crafted items to be the main issue here.
If defensive spells are equally an issue, one could imagine similar cost transformations for spells granting shields. But I don't think that that's the real problem, because you can anyhow have only a single time any spell active, so if you don't have it on the item you'll have it cast anyhow, so if it's broken on the item you have to consider it broken as a spell in the first place. If the issue is with its combination with defensive items, then my proposal works. Of course though, this is all nice and all but if you can't change the item rolling procedure... Well... This is confirmed hopeless ^_^' heroes will always be broken, due to found items.

[Seravy]

If it's off the table, then it's off the table and I won't suggest it again.

It's off the table. Balance purpose changes should be subtle and not feel out of place. "accessory stats cost 2x" isn't like that. Especially in a system where everything costs the same on every item. An Armor slot is already somewhat superior to an Accessory slot and making this gap larger would just mean players will stop using the heroes that do not have an Armor slot.

Another issue is the found items. Can you change the item creation procedure?

Like how? Unless "more random items" is checked in the settings, the found item is always one of the 250 predefined ones, so we have full control over what can be found. We have had discussions about the predefined items and have specifically made sure it contains a healthy mix of items of all power levels but keeps the more unbalanced abilities rare. You can use the "itemanal" tool to create an output of these items where you can read how often each stat or ability appears on them.

so if it's broken on the item you have to consider it broken as a spell in the first place.

That's not how it works. You can stack 6-10 item powers on a hero safely. Doing that with spells only ensures you'll be hit by Dispel Magic every combat. They are by no means identical.

As for having no defensive items in treasure at all, that's not doable for three reasons :
1. Half the item powers and stats are defensive. So found items would be very redundant, boring and unfun.
2. Heroes would be unplayable without Artificier. The AI is bad at creating items, so heroes would be unplayable for the AI as well.
3. Random items - found if that option is enabled, would suddenly be superior to predefined items because random items would have these abilities.

I don't understand how a discussion about the book costs of item powers turned into this. Hero defense is perfectly fine as long as you don't get the hero too early - the game is full of armor piercing and ignoring effects for this very reason, but they generally aren't early game effects.

[Arnuz]

1. stats cost - I haven't proposed to make all stats cost more on jewels at all! I have suggested to link specific stat types to the specific slots more, making the cost of specific types of buffs depend on the slot. So, armor is where most of the defence should come from. Similarly, attack and to-hit should usually be fund on weapons. One could imagine doing the same for resistance and spell effects, and concentrating them on jewels. The purpose is to make it less easy to minmax, and do a super item set that grants +15 def within '03. So this has a purpose, and I wouldn't find it out of place, but of course aesthetics of balance are subjective, so...

2. random items - ah! That's good to hear. I thought that without "more random items" you still had an amount of random items, just less. Still, as a consequence of the idea above the predefined items would need to be reviewed. (which might well be too much work, or more than you're willing to do, and that'd be perfectly understandable)

3. I merely suggested to concentrate defensive (shield) items on armor slots, making it less likely to find and more expensive to craft the other types, so that there are less sources of stacking. I haven't proposed to blanket remove shield items! I haven't understood yet if you can change the random item rolling procedure, maybe that's the issue?

I don't understand how a discussion about the book costs of item powers turned into this. Hero defense is perfectly fine as long as you don't get the hero too early - the game is full of armor piercing and ignoring effects for this very reason, but they generally aren't early game effects.

Oh, well... I had a different impression of the consensus, frankly. Zitro and Nelphine seem to consider hero defence a major issue as well? Maybe I'm mistaken, mind you. It might also be a matter of time perspective. For me it doesn't matter if in 1415 there's a super hero with all possible stats, the game is won or lost beforehand. OTOH... If in 1405 you can fortress strike a wizard by stacking a lot of defensive items - and with a fast start, lair exploration focus you can - then there's an issue imho. That's where I'm coming from. I admit that the comparison with super rares is outside of my area of interest, my apologies if I've mistaken the discussion for what it isn't... (I haven't had much opportunity to participate to the cost one for RL)

[Nelphine]

Its probably my fault that this turned into hero defense. I won't even use heroes seriously because I consider them overpowered I win buttons. I probably said something like that one too many times in the wrong place, so people thought this thread was a more general discussion on heroes, not a discussion about book requirements. (Which I think is a moot point because if you want to use heroes most effectively you shouldn't make your own items anyway.)

[Seravy]

1. If we both agree that defense makes good heroes, and not every hero can equip armor, then the conclusion is you want to make some heroes inferior by not allowing them to have good defense. That's poor design.
2. Yes, you have random items but only if no unfound predefined item exists in the required cost range. This typically is the case for very low value items only where I prefer not to have anything predefined - a predefined +2 attack sword is a waste of a slot, it's not any better than a random item.
3. See 1. If one hero has access to +8 defense on Armor while the other has to pay double/triple/quadruple for the half the total amount possible, which hero do you employ? I would always get the one who can wear the armor and that is a greater problem by itself.

Oh, well... I had a different impression of the consensus, frankly. Zitro and Nelphine seem to consider hero defence a major issue as well?

Defense is a major issue in the early game. You don't get early heroes. So we already solved that.
Later, the amount of troops on the board is so high, a single high defense hero is no longer capable of winning the game by itself, and the presence of various armor piercing spells and effects makes using one efficiently require skill and experience with the game which is what we want - strategies should be able to win, but only if the player puts in enough effort to play it well.
At least, this is the intention. If you can consistently reproduce a victory on high difficulty using heroes that comes obviously too easily, then we can add this to the "known problems" list and try to solve it.

Also, there is no such thing as "consensus" without proof. When someone posts 3 Youtube videos showing himself beating the highest difficulty level 3 times in a row using a certain strategy in 3 hours each without much effort then we have a consensus - facts are facts, can't argue with them. (Yes, this has happened before) If that doesn't happen, everyone will have their own opinion and aside from "we need to pay more attention to this for a while" nothing else can be done. Hero defense falls into this category currently.
Also, if the proof does exist, we need to be extra careful to conclude which part of said strategy is the root of the problem. In the above case, which was an artificier strategy, the problem could have been summed up by "too powerful items can be made too early when the AI is not ready for that". So we removed "Create Artifact" from the starting spells. We also made sure perfect items of that kind don't appear in the predefined item list, or at least not often enough to unbalance the game. So you won't be finding a 6 shields, invulnerability, resist magic, wraith form item every third game like back then.

[Seravy]

PS : Heroes won't be enabled before turn 30 because their resource producing abilities are too powerful for that, regardless of hero defense. So we can safely ignore the early game. (and no, prisoners don't count, you have to produce troops to clear a node to find any, and that takes turns. Maybe not the whole 30 but most of it. A prisoner has 400 treasure value so it won't be rewarded for killing a single guardian spirit.)