Caster of Magic II Bug Reports!

[Seravy]

I double checked and the Necromancy value should be displayed on the unit.

..oh you mean you want to see the production cost of units themselves? That would be completely useless information wasting space and attention for any case where you don't have a Necromancy item in your current battle. Sorry, it's not an improvement, even though it seems to be, clogging the UI with too much data that is almost never needed makes games less fun to play. It's inconvenient but if you plan to rely heavily on your Necromancy item(s), you should look at the cost of the units in your city production screen or manual before the battle. After a few battles, you'll remember the costs anyway.

I understand that AI is not a priority at this time, but in ultimate philosophy, would you please consider untying the AI's hand and enforcing the same rules on them? Yes, it is a lot of work to develop strong AI, I know.

No, you don't understand at all.
The AI is my top priority in the game and this is the best solution I came up with that is the most enjoyable to play against and results in an appropriate level of challenge without too many exploitable problems or AI behavior.

Also, if I start enforcing the same rules that goes both ways, severely limiting the freedom of the human player. Not fun.

[WhiteMage]

I double checked and the Necromancy value should be displayed on the unit.

..oh you mean you want to see the production cost of units themselves? That would be completely useless information wasting space and attention for any case where you don't have a Necromancy item in your current battle. Sorry, it's not an improvement, even though it seems to be, clogging the UI with too much data that is almost never needed makes games less fun to play. It's inconvenient but if you plan to rely heavily on your Necromancy item(s), you should look at the cost of the units in your city production screen or manual before the battle. After a few battles, you'll remember the costs anyway.

I understand that AI is not a priority at this time, but in ultimate philosophy, would you please consider untying the AI's hand and enforcing the same rules on them? Yes, it is a lot of work to develop strong AI, I know.

No, you don't understand at all.
The AI is my top priority in the game and this is the best solution I came up with that is the most enjoyable to play against and results in an appropriate level of challenge without too many exploitable problems or AI behavior.

Also, if I start enforcing the same rules that goes both ways, severely limiting the freedom of the human player. Not fun.

Do you mean the hammer/mana production costs of units drive the Necromancy budget? That is better. It is different than in COM, IIRC.

It would be also possible to conditionally display those values on the units only if a necromancy skill/item is present in the battle.

I am glad that coding the strong AI is already your top priority. I am surprised though that they do not scout. Is the AI intended to always have knowledge about my cities and units so they know exactly where they are without exploring/seeing them? That was the case in COM, IIRC.

Which rules being enforced on human players would make it no fun?

[Seravy]

Yes, hammer cost for normal units.
Fantastic units, I think the cost used for determining experience value and AI decisions is used for them so unfortunately those are harder to know but it's roughly similar to the casting cost -  30-100 on commons, 110-250 on uncommons, 300+ for rares and ~500 on very rares.

I am surprised though that they do not scout. Is the AI intended to always have knowledge about my cities and units so they know exactly where they are without exploring/seeing them? That was the case in COM, IIRC.

Yes, for purposes of moving or attacking them. They can't target them with city curses though nor terrain near unscouted cities, however they can freely target units with spells like Fire Storm without having to be near the unit and seeing it. They are also unaffected by invisibility outside combat, as it's way too exploitable, as well as inconvenient for the player, when the AIs end up unintentionally attack their armies.

Which rules being enforced on human players would make it no fun?

For example the AI decides in diplomacy based on their personality, various formulas, etc and cannot make their own decision - they must be predicatable and act as the rules dictate.
The player has complete freedom to do anything. Like, if the AI casts Raise Volcano on your cities many times, you can ignore that. The AI doesn't have the option and is forced to eventually declare war. The player is free to break their Wizard's Pact and attack on the same turn. The AI is unable to do that and generally can't break the pact without a significant reason and even if they do, they cannot attack that turn, and cannot attack later until they also succeed a war declaration roll or a hostility roll.
The player is allowed to declare war and conquer based on what is the best for their strategy. The AI declares war based on diplomacy rules and completely ignores strategy.

So in a game where the rules are the same, you'd be forced to declare war if the AI raises X amount of volcanoes on your land. You'd be forced to declare war on everyone with nearly equal military force as you unless your relation with them is good. You'd be unable to offer tribute to other wizards, and would be forbidden to trade spells unless your receive a spell of nearly equal value. No trading down or up to a better or worse spell.

These are just some random examples but in general the AI is bound by additional rules in diplomacy and there are few in other areas. I generally try to make the AI play by the same rules whereever it's possible, but for example they had to be restricted on using the Disjunction or Spell Blast spells because the game wouldn't be playable or wouldn't be fun without those restrictions.
On the other hand the AI players don't need to have fun so you are allowed to use Spell Blast on them every turn or dispel all of their enchantments.

[WhiteMage]

Yes, for purposes of moving or attacking them. They can't target them with city curses though nor terrain near unscouted cities, however they can freely target units with spells like Fire Storm without having to be near the unit and seeing it. They are also unaffected by invisibility outside combat, as it's way too exploitable, as well as inconvenient for the player, when the AIs end up unintentionally attack their armies.

Which rules being enforced on human players would make it no fun?

For example the AI decides in diplomacy based on their personality, various formulas, etc and cannot make their own decision - they must be predicatable and act as the rules dictate.
The player has complete freedom to do anything. Like, if the AI casts Raise Volcano on your cities many times, you can ignore that. The AI doesn't have the option and is forced to eventually declare war. The player is free to break their Wizard's Pact and attack on the same turn. The AI is unable to do that and generally can't break the pact without a significant reason and even if they do, they cannot attack that turn, and cannot attack later until they also succeed a war declaration roll or a hostility roll.
The player is allowed to declare war and conquer based on what is the best for their strategy. The AI declares war based on diplomacy rules and completely ignores strategy.

So in a game where the rules are the same, you'd be forced to declare war if the AI raises X amount of volcanoes on your land. You'd be forced to declare war on everyone with nearly equal military force as you unless your relation with them is good. You'd be unable to offer tribute to other wizards, and would be forbidden to trade spells unless your receive a spell of nearly equal value. No trading down or up to a better or worse spell.

These are just some random examples but in general the AI is bound by additional rules in diplomacy and there are few in other areas. I generally try to make the AI play by the same rules whereever it's possible, but for example they had to be restricted on using the Disjunction or Spell Blast spells because the game wouldn't be playable or wouldn't be fun without those restrictions.
On the other hand the AI players don't need to have fun so you are allowed to use Spell Blast on them every turn or dispel all of their enchantments.

I understand. I can see a way to make this more balanced and more diverse, hence more fun. Maybe there can be one more personality for the AI where it can play by free hands just like a human. And a human player can choose to pick up one of the existing AI personalities and play by its restrictions and rewards. When a human player picks a restrictive personality at game start those rules will be enforced on the human and can't change it. It would cost something like -3 picks. So you can get 3 extra books or something...

I remember Spell Blast being very annoying in MOM. It was an OP spell. It could be balanced somehow, rather than only allowing it for humans players to use it. This will be especially important if this game eventually becomes a multiplayer game...

[Seravy]

It might be interesting to have a new score modifier where AI players play freely according to what is beneficial for their strategy and diplomacy is entirely disabled. It's low priority though.

[Mqz]

WhiteMage>
I agree. ALT+F4 is weird, annoyed the heck out of me in the beginning, now I don't mind anymore.
I agree. AI should always play by the same rules as the player, they don't though. And I have a very hard time thinking of any games where they do actually..
I disagree. I think that is a bit excessive for a pretty fringe skill. There are insane amounts of rules that isn't properly explained ingame, that one I think should be quite low on the list if anything should be added.

Suppanut>
Jackal Riders with a sorcery wizard would crush any amount of air elementals, they would not stand a chance. They are shockingly weak and Jackal Riders are much stronger than most think.
Jackal riders melee 8 attack x 8 figures = 64 attack for just one (Veteran) Jackal riders (magic weapon) and 24 hp each.
With 9 units that is 576 melee attack each round and 216 hp total.
Air elemental melee 15 attack x 1 figure x 9 units = 135 melee attack each round and 90 hp total.
(Both have same chance to hit, but invis give them a small boost, only thing that is ever keeping Air elementals alive is their flying, but if Jackal Riders have a wizard with flying spell...)
Anyway.. I am rambling.. I tried quite a bit of jackals vs Air elemntals autofights, I couldn't really find anything wrong.. Upload a savegame if you experience something suspicious

This is still from version 1.1.2

264)
I managed to pick 4 very rare spells instead of 3. This is very easy to replicate.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6qz71tf9wind3e...e.mp4?dl=0

265)
When picking starting spells "help text" are wrong for four spells (nagas, Psionic blast, Phantom Beast and Philosopher's stone), they are linking to the spells from the next page.
See video from number 264

266)
When using the bug in number 264 the extra very rare spell you pick starts as one of the immediat research options, wee..

267)
Autobattels are 34 turns long instead of 25 turns, intentionel? I am guessing yes. Can be seen in the logs from the Wall of Darkness test.

268)
Text in v. 1.2.0 notes.
Typo: "-Added EcoResearch.CAS script to calculate the power generated by cities."
Typo: "-Added EcoFood.CAS script to calculate the power generated by cities."


Note: Could we get a setting that removes the [Buy] buttons confirmation request?
(What I really want is to be able to make a city autobuy the next 1-10 buildings/units without me having to find the city and press buy/yes each turn.)

Note: Can we get a setting/option/function in debugmode that keeps debugmode on forever?
Annoying to have a crash when you start the game and debug mode isn't activated yet. Happens quite often actually..
Maybe something like "\Master of Magic Caster Windows\Caster.exe -debugmode on" ?

[Seravy]

264-266 - These should already be fixed in 1.2
267 - I do see the max turn constant is 35 but I don't remember if that's a typo or not. Most likely intentional as it makes no difference. The battle won't reach 25 turns unless both sides are unable to damage the other or some weird armies with all HP and minimal attack strength are involved on both sides.

Autobuy : Right click on your queue. The building should turn pink, indicating it will be automatically bought when the queue reaches it. Works on the first building in the queue as well to buy it instantly.

Debug : I will add that as a modding.ini option. I've been using that as a hardcoded feature quite a lot, actually.

[WhiteMage]

WhiteMage>
I agree. ALT+F4 is weird, annoyed the heck out of me in the beginning, now I don't mind anymore.
I agree. AI should always play by the same rules as the player, they don't though. And I have a very hard time thinking of any games where they do actually..
I disagree. I think that is a bit excessive for a pretty fringe skill. There are insane amounts of rules that isn't properly explained ingame, that one I think should be quite low on the list if anything should be added.

Yes, annoyed me first, but less after that. Now it is just extra time to close it. I estimate it will annoy >90% of users.

C-Evo is a 4X TBS game where the AI plays by the exact same rules as the human players. Battle for Wesnoth too, AFAIK. Also, Chess, Checkers, Go, etc. Almost all board games and card games. Dominus Galaxia is another 4X TBS, where the goal is to make AIs play by exact same rules, there are only a few minor exceptions left to finish coding...

[Mqz]

This is still from version 1.1.2

269)
Declaring peace with an AI don't remove their curses on my citys.. (Chaos rift/evil presence..). I'm guessing that is the same between AI's? Won't that just result in war again quickly?

270)
Tried the autobuy function, freaking sweet, why didn't I know this excisted?!? Why is this not mentioned in the manual ?
Having a building destroyed by Chaos Rift (prolly any other way too?), makes the destroyed building getting placed in the building queue automatically. But I can still select to build the building too..
If I auto buy the first I can place the extra building into the queue too. Except for having to build the same building two times there dosn't seem to be any obvious bad ramifications from double building, result is only one building.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/frs6uj0b7epot6...g.png?dl=0

271)
Having trade goods in the list sometimes have the automatically re-build building placed below trade goods resulting in it never getting build.
Having housing selected instead result in Trade Goods automatically being added to the queue instead of housing, having to reselect housing for the list again.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/bhps47bkxhy0ff...r.png?dl=0

[Seravy]

269. Yes, same. No it won't result in a war. Only global enchantments have a recurring "per turn" penalty, city enchantments do not. They only generate a penalty when cast.
270. Yeah, I only added it to the manual a few days ago. There are probably quite a few minor UI improvements that were randomly requested during beta and never got added to the manual.

Edit : When adding the destroyed building, the system doesn't remove then readd the housing/trade, which it should normally do before adding anything to the queue. I'll add this to the next upload.