Caster of Magic II Brainstorming Megathread

[MrBiscuits]

I don't like the idea, it's definitely not meant for games where territory can overlap between players. Besides, if I conquered the AI's city, it's my territory so I can use the roads to conquer the next one. Solves nothing. It can only work in games where territory ownership doesn't change instantly. (to begin with, it doesn't even exist in MoM beyond the Wizard's Pact rule.)

Yes true it might not work with shared territory.

Different map sizes was the first thing I added.
Different land % wrecks game balance by shortening travel times and removing the relevance of sea travel mechanics, and has no benefit. Different landmass distribution settings were added instead so while it's always X land tiles on a specific map, it can be either a lot of small islands or fewer, larger continents.

It does change the game balance, but it might be nice to play a game without too much sea travel if you want. If definitely makes games longer have to move units around on boats.

Also the current game has different land % at the same map size.

There are two optional game modifier settings planned, one for "equal wizards on each plane" and one for "other plane is empty".
I don't plan to add a button for "no one starts on my plane so I win". That's what Myrran does if you select Normal or Easy difficulty, and that's exactly the place this feature belongs.
However, "equal on both planes" should come close enough, as it removes the crowded from your starting plane.
Or, maybe the result you get by selecting only 1-2 enemy players but Maximal land size could be closer to what you want. Map size is scaled by player count so 12 players get basically 6x as much land as 2 players.

It's fun to play different styles of games, such as being the only player on your plane but having roaming monsters turned very high, so it becomes a game of survival. 

My ideal game would probably be 4-5 wizards on the starting plane, with 2-3 on the other one, so it is still a challenge when you break through towers, but not a huge war of attrition that happens there is just one opponent on there.

The sandbox element of 4X is an important part of the game.

[Seravy]

My ideal game would probably be 4-5 wizards on the starting plane, with 2-3 on the other one, so it is still a challenge when you break through towers, but not a huge war of attrition that happens there is just one opponent on there.

That pretty much perfectly describes the default mode though.
It's 1 additional Myrran wizards for each 4 Arcanus players, starting at the 6th which becomes the 2nd Myrran.

[MrBiscuits]

My ideal game would probably be 4-5 wizards on the starting plane, with 2-3 on the other one, so it is still a challenge when you break through towers, but not a huge war of attrition that happens there is just one opponent on there.

That pretty much perfectly describes the default mode though.
It's 1 additional Myrran wizards for each 4 Arcanus players, starting at the 6th which becomes the 2nd Myrran.

Does the 4 Arcanus players include the human player?

Although the map size scales by number of players, so if you want to have more than 1 opponent on Myrror you need to play a larger map? I was hoping to play smaller maps, but with more than one opponent on the other plane.

On another note, does anyone build spearmen? Yes they are cheaper than swordsmen, but they are almost completely useless in comparison. After a few turns in most cities you can build a swordsman in one turn, so the cost saving isn't significant.

Maybe give them +1 defence, 2 extra figures and negate strike like pikemen and raise the cost to 20, so they are of some use in battle.

[Seravy]

Does the 4 Arcanus players include the human player?

No.

Although the map size scales by number of players, so if you want to have more than 1 opponent on Myrror you need to play a larger map? I was hoping to play smaller maps, but with more than one opponent on the other plane.

You can set Tiny or Minimal land with 7 players for that result.

On another note, does anyone build spearmen? Yes they are cheaper than swordsmen, but they are almost completely useless in comparison

Spearmen are used when you need units to sacrifice. For scouting nodes or when you just need something to attack the enemy stack so you can cast spells on them.

[MrBiscuits]

Spearmen are used when you need units to sacrifice. For scouting nodes or when you just need something to attack the enemy stack so you can cast spells on them.

Well yes, but it would be nice to have other uses too rather than just being a complete junk unit. Also swordsmen are better for baiting the enemy stacks as they are more likely to survive getting hit by firebolt/fireball or ranged attacks when you attack. As both are built in a turn, why would you ever build a spearman?

[Seravy]

Well, production carries over so the 15 difference does matter, especially if you build many.

4 of them and you've wasted the price of a Library.

[roarmalf]

First of all, thanks for all your hard work! It's great to see you get rewarded for everything you've done for the community

I love some of the ideas you've already put in to CoM II, and I'm excited to see where else you take it. Here are a few things that I've always wanted to change that you might be able to deal with now:

1. Getting penalized in diplomacy for defending a node
The most frequent scenario is when I'm playing a more peaceful game and I take over a node in neutral territory. I patrol a low level unit in it. An AI that I have a pact with builds an outpost next to it. Now I have units in their territory and I have to abandon my node to keep peace. This is very counterintuitive, and against certain personalities can ruin your game.

I recognize that probably some/all of this isn't even possible based on the existing code, but here are some ideas:

• Units in nodes don't trigger negative diplomatic reactions (potential problems with amassing armies for sneak attacks)
  
• A single unit in a node won't trigger negative diplomatic reactions, more than one would trigger as usual (I think this is ideal, but I don't know if it can be coded)
  
• Units in "AI territory" when a treaty is signed are exempt from negative diplomatic relations
  
• Units in "AI territory" as a result of new settlements are exempt from negative diplomatic relations
  
  1.5 Certain "peaceful" units do not trigger negative diplomatic relations, e.g. settlers, engineers, magic spirits (maybe) 
  Bolding this one because it would solve #1, but I think it could be a new unique unit effect and open up some cool options strategically, and new units/summons: spies, shape changers, diplomats, scouts, healers that don't deal damage, etc. I love this as a new feature if it's doable programming wise and could be a part of one of the new Halfling split races as a peaceful research race) This has been done in Civ games with some cool applications, and I think could fit in really well in CoM.  

2. I can't see my total gold when an artifact shows up for sale! (I don't remember if this affects mercs or not)

There's a good chance this is already solved by other changes, but if not here are a few (I think) easy solutions:

• Resize the Artifact for Sale window to be a little more narrow so that gold is visible
  
• Slide the window to the left so that gold is visible
  
• Swap gold and magic in the status bar on the right
  
• Allow the player to delay the choice until later (end of turn?) so they can look at their current heroes, items, and gold before deciding. 
  

[Seravy]

1.5 Certain "peaceful" units do not trigger negative diplomatic relations, e.g. settlers, engineers, magic spirits (maybe)

That's already how it works. People don't read the manual and even placing this information in the FAQ section at the beginning was of no use. The Wizard's Pact ingame help entry is rarely found by the users either.
Is there anything else I could do to get people to actually be aware of this feature?
It has been part of MoM ever since the original 26 years ago.

2. I can't see my total gold when an artifact shows up for sale! (I don't remember if this affects mercs or not)

Weirdly i don't remember this being a problem but I'll pay more attention next time an artifact appears. If necessary, it's trivial to move the window or swap gold/mana for CoM II.

[roarmalf]

1.5 Certain "peaceful" units do not trigger negative diplomatic relations, e.g. settlers, engineers, magic spirits (maybe)

That's already how it works. People don't read the manual and even placing this information in the FAQ section at the beginning was of no use. The Wizard's Pact ingame help entry is rarely found by the users either.
Is there anything else I could do to get people to actually be aware of this feature?
It has been part of MoM ever since the original 26 years ago.

Sorry, I should have suggested expanding which units have this diplomatic immunity. Including spearmen might be a nice touch. Currently there's no unit with diplomatic immunity that would be reasonable to use for holding a node. 

It also opens up new strategies if there are a few powerful units with the ability maybe a summon and a late game unit of a Halfling split that's unlocked with a later building. Maybe a bishop: requires cathedral (and possibly one other building).

Either way, engineers and settlers don't work for #1 primarily because of limited movement but also because of race restrictions (engineers) and cost (settlers).

[Seravy]

Either way, engineers and settlers don't work for #1 primarily because of limited movement

Yes, that's the important part.
If it's not in your territory and it's inconvenient to get the move 1 unit there because you have no cities in the area then it's not really your node, it's theirs and it's perfectly reasonable they want you to leave.
Settlers are not cheap but I wouldn't consider spending 1 population and 150 production for a node unreasonable and they are available for everyone.