Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: World Map Vs. Tactical Map

  1. #11
    Caster of the Inner Tower
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    France
    Posts
    735
    Quote Originally Posted by War Troll View Post
    I like these ideas. I think casting direct damage spells strategically should simply be less effective than in tactical, otherwise it could detract too much from the importance of engaging on the battlefield.
    If like in MoM and like I think (and hope) it'll be in WoM the casting skill limits the number of overland spells you can cast, but each battle uses its own counter, we need the exact opposite : direct damage spells should be more efficient strategically, or they'll just almost never be used so. You always have so many things to do with city/global/unit enchantemnts, summonings, crafting, ... so I almost never cast a direct damage (or similar) spell strategically, just engage battle, and you can cast your spells without using your precious overland casting skill.

  2. #12
    Archmage of the Central Tower Happerry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,770
    Quote Originally Posted by kilobug View Post
    If like in MoM and like I think (and hope) it'll be in WoM the casting skill limits the number of overland spells you can cast, but each battle uses its own counter,
    This is how the Wiki claims things work, yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by devoncop View Post
    What you could do is give a % chance of strategic spells hitting units. The greater the number of units in a city the greater the chance of being hit.
    The damage would remain the same as tactical spells.

    Forts should reduce the chance of a hit to units.... Maximum number of units hit to equal level of sorcerer casting to reflect greater power of more powerful Sorcerers........

    Would that work?
    I think that the chance of hitting units should also vary with the spell, not just be a flat number.

  3. #13
    Troy, you make a good point about the skill limit. I was mulling that point over myself yesterday.

    Devoncop, that is an interesting suggestion. Giving them a % chance to hit would change the dynamic up a bit.

    Mmilleder, you also make a very good point. Fireball is a cheap, low-tier spell from the point of view of “Raining death on your enemies from nowhere”.

    Asmodai, that is a very simple (and therefor elegant) solution. You also get the “good point” admonition from me, lol. (And from a technical point of view they are going to be separate spells. You just get both when you do the research.)

    War Troll.... good point... (I mean, what am I supposed to say guys!?!?! He does make a good point... I'm writing this as I'm reading each post. I'm trying to hammer the ideas together into one piece...) We can't let world spells destroy the importance of tactical battles. At least not until late game...

    ampoliros, we're really talking about AoE damage spells. Enchantments, summons, etc, are all very easy. As you point out: they all do almost the exact same thing. However, we do have to consider the fact that “cursing” an enemy unit on the world map will make the effect persistent. That's the difference we have to deal with.

    Zdsdead, this post is just full of good ideas. It' hard to pick one, lol.

    Kilobug, overland spells will be limited by Casting Skill. So, you're quite right.

    Happerry, saving throws do add a random “hit” element to it. I think that may be enough to start with. Play testing can show us if we need to add more “random”.

    OK guys, I've been thinking as I've been reading and typing. This is my suggestion for combing most of these suggestions and coming up with something that will do the job.

    First, world map damage spells are more expensive. The effects you're going for are more grand. You're not using a scalpel to tactically cut your enemies up, you're lobbing a bomb in their direction hoping to hit everything even anywhere near them. So, you're focusing on the “area” in “area of effect”.

    Second, all world map spells make use of Casting Skill. You can only cast one “Casting Skill”'s worth of spell(s) per turn. If you're Casting Skill isn't high enough it may actually take more than one turn. This will prevent “spamming” damage spells on the world map until you are super powerful. The higher spell cost will also slow this down.

    Third, we leave the damage alone. What we're looking at is a spell that covers the entire army. You pay for that with the increased cost. Fireball cast on the world map is actually “Super Huge Giant Fireball”, we just don't call it that. You can't use “Super Huge Giant Fireball” on the tactical map because “The spell is too big! If I cast it, the battle will be over!” (← Tell me what that's a modified quote from for 10 points!).

    So, at the end of the day the wold map versions become giant sized versions doing the same damage but costing more mana limited by Casting Skill.

    Can we all live with that?
    Everybody needs friends! Aaron's Facebook Page

  4. #14
    Caster of the Inner Tower
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    France
    Posts
    735
    That's a nice solution for me

  5. #15
    Battlemage
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    343
    I'm ok with that. However I'm sort of curious what will be done to keep lower level spells useful through the game. Do I have any reason to cast fireball when I learn fire storm if the only difference is cost and both can be cast on tactical and strategical? I mean if the cost is not prohibitive then I'd be always casting the more damaging spell but if it is then I'd never use that.

    I assume we don't have anything like metamagic feats to so we can cast heightened, maximized, quickened or empowered versions? Those are pretty much the only things that keep lower level spells "competitive" but that would also mean that why spend resources on learning fire storm if heightened and empowered fireball does the same thing so essentially we have things in reverse.

    This gets back to what I said about destruction spells needing variety that goes beyond "do x damage of y type". I already sort of see signs of this in the alpha spell selection (I know it's not balanced) and even within a single sphere. For example I don't see any reason to cast flame strike. Smaller area for a huge casting cost and marginally higher save.

    What I mean is as follows. All these are destruction spells since their primary role is to destroy or damage units.

    Tier1: Drain life deals negative damage but heals allied hero. Heals undead instead.
    Tier2: Lava fount creates persistent 1 tile damage field that hurls projectiles at random nearby targets
    Tier3: Sunburst damages undead and blinds living units
    Tier3: Fireball is direct AoE damage on tactical or overland. Also available for some wizard units.
    Tier3: Flash freeze is tactical only but does moderate cold and immobilizes units within area
    Tier4: Flame strike is tactical only but also sets target on fire (DoT). Also for some priest units.
    Tier4: Ice storm freezes water/creates tundra when cast overland making it damage/terraform hybrid
    Tier5: Lightning surge may disintegrate weaker units outright but also does high single target damage.
    Tier6: Cloud of embers creates a persistent damaging and blinding cloud but also conceals units there
    Tier7: Word of Death forces all figures in a unit to resist or die outright but does nothing if save succeeds
    Tier8: Fire storm damages all foes on battlefield but does not affect allies. Tactical only.
    Tier9: Implosion tries to destroy each figure in the target unit selected by caster in the beginning of their turn.
    etc etc
    Last edited by Beregar; 11-14-2013 at 07:32 PM.

  6. #16
    Beregar, you raise some interesting questions. They're not really on-topic, but we can start a new thread if we need one

    Keeping low-tier spells important is something we want to do as much as we can. However, there are going to be cases where one spell will supplant another. Now, one factor that does change the mix is the “power bar” (or whatever we call it). It doesn't work exactly like meta-magic feats, but it does allow you to up the damage of spells for additional mana. So, you might be able to cast a “powered up” fireball that did the same damage as Fire Storm for less mana. (Of course, in this case Fire Storm is going to affect a smaller area with higher top-end damage.) That's just one example. The best way to keep low-tier spells from becoming obsolete is to keep redundancy out of the spell lineup as much as possible.

    Of course, that also has its own problems. A player's potential spell list varies from game to game. (Unless you take one of the Mastery Disciplines) So, if we trim the fat and make sure we only have one fire based area damage spell the player may or may not get it. If they don't, that's it, they don't. Now obviously, as there is a random element, that could happen even if we had two or three similar spells. However, by adding similar spells with slight differences to the lineup we increase the odds that the player will get the type of spell they want and be able to work with it.

    The numbers in the Alpha aren't at all what your going to see. We're still playing around with some things, but we are keeping an eye on the D20 numbers as we do so. Fireball does 6D6 to up to nine units, Flame Strike does 10D6 to a single target. When we add the “power bar” you'll be able to add more damage to each. We will need to adjust the “power up” cost so that both are useful.

    If we want to talk about this more we should really start a new thread on the subject.
    Everybody needs friends! Aaron's Facebook Page

  7. #17
    Battlemage
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
    If we want to talk about this more we should really start a new thread on the subject.
    Yes. I'd like to discuss this. I'd rather avoid having massive overlap while still having spells that can be easily identified for what they are. I always played MoM for its spells. For me they are the most important part of the game. I prefer strategical elements over tactical. If I can kill enemies before they force me into a tactical battle that's great but if I can't I want to kill them fast with powerful spells and temporary units rather than with built units.

  8. #18
    You can kick off a new thread if you like or I can early next week. (It's the weekend and I plan to goof off a bit, lol.)
    Everybody needs friends! Aaron's Facebook Page

  9. #19
    Sorcerer
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Kortenaken, BE
    Posts
    61
    I'd like to see world map-spells just hitting a percentage of your units.
    I'm out in the field, miles away from an enemy sorcerer who's up in a castle, preparing a fireball spell for me.
    Imagining he can only conjure up his fireball from where he stands, he's going to have to have a pretty amazing 'magic aim' to hit us straight in the back. And if I'd see it coming, I'd damn well get out of its freaking way?
    So in practically no case, all my units would get hit.
    So high casting cost + lower % of hit and maybe also more variable levels of dmg. And I want low-lvl tier units that have an auto-spell reflect characteristic on the world map (settlers, engineers).

    Stat!

  10. #20
    I'm working on adding the Tactical and World map break down to some of the spells. Here's the first example: http://wastelands-interactive.com/me...Spell_fireball

    Thoughts?
    Everybody needs friends! Aaron's Facebook Page

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
footer