Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30

Thread: Mana Points and spell scalability

  1. #11
    Acolyte
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Alverca do Ribatejo, Portugal
    Posts
    13
    well i wasn´t a fan of the distance penalty in MoM either, and i guess that´s why it worked. it forced the player to make more choices especially in regard to battle strategy (when, where, and how), and choosing and developing heroes with or without casting ability inherent.

    i felt that it added to the game, giving the tactical battle more depth and finesse, and in a word more TACTICAL. with no penalty, and sufficient mana reserves it would be pretty much a no-brainer just to sledge hammer the opposition with DoT or direct damage spells repeatedly. there would really be no need to consider what unit types and strategy to bring to the battle screen unless you were attacking a horde of creatures with magic immunity, because there would be no need to engage (flame strike anyone?).

    i figured strategy might be something we´d be looking for in a strategy game...

    just my two cents.

  2. #12
    Abecedarian Mage Trudd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bordeaux (France)
    Posts
    174
    I think that distance penalty is a necessary drawback.
    It reduce the expansion will and let other sorcerers to grow.
    At the beginning, you are able to clean the surrondings with your spell, but for the early big expansion you must rely more on your army and become more strategic.

    I even think that distance penalty is one of the most important detail that made MoM so interresting.
    It is a limitating detail and give the feeling of being less powerful, but it contribute to make MoM a little more difficult and strategic (as we can see with the power of the channeler skill, which pass from 1 to 2 tier cost with patchs)

  3. #13
    It's going to need play testing. It's as simple as that.

    One problem with the penalty is maintaining balance. It gives a certain advantage to non-combat spells. If you focus on summoning or augmentation you can get your mana into the battle with no penalty. A player focusing on destruction will have to pay a penalty to get his mana on the battlefield, if you see what I mean. (Of course, balance is always the tricky bit. I'm just saying that we need to consider it.)

  4. #14
    Arcane Candidate
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5
    you would want the permision of the creator, but this is a vancian to psionic conversion. It converts all core spells, classes, and PRCs to psionic mechanics.

  5. #15
    Acolyte
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Alverca do Ribatejo, Portugal
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
    It's going to need play testing. It's as simple as that.

    One problem with the penalty is maintaining balance. It gives a certain advantage to non-combat spells. If you focus on summoning or augmentation you can get your mana into the battle with no penalty. A player focusing on destruction will have to pay a penalty to get his mana on the battlefield, if you see what I mean. (Of course, balance is always the tricky bit. I'm just saying that we need to consider it.)
    yeah, i hadn´t considered the summoning loophole. an option for that would be to adapt the range penalty to the upkeep of a summoned fantastic, which would actually be consistent with the difficulty of maintaining allegiance/control of the summoned entity or troop over distance from the wizard´s fortress/summoning circle. i wouldn´t think it to be too terribly convoluted as the distance modifier could be identical for both combat range penalties and unit upkeep.

  6. #16
    Moderator Aldaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Buenos Aires, Argentina
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobthe6th View Post
    you would want the permision of the creator, but this is a vancian to psionic conversion. It converts all core spells, classes, and PRCs to psionic mechanics.
    That link is awesome!
    “We don’t stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.”

    George Bernard Shaw

  7. #17
    Arcane Candidate
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5
    I mean, the developers should really look into homebrew content for D20... the creators tend to allow its use fairly freely. Or at least freer then WotC.

  8. #18
    Archmage of the Central Tower Happerry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,770
    Of course, the player with destruction might be able to murder the enemy stacks with a meteor storm from the main map without having to go into actual combat with the enemies super buffed units, so that extra casting cost might be fully worth it...

  9. #19
    Arcane Candidate
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5
    I personally play a chanaler every game of MoM, and any time I don't the extra cost just irritates me.

  10. #20
    Moderator Asmodai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Fredericksburg, VA (USA)
    Posts
    794
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
    It's going to need play testing. It's as simple as that.

    One problem with the penalty is maintaining balance. It gives a certain advantage to non-combat spells. If you focus on summoning or augmentation you can get your mana into the battle with no penalty. A player focusing on destruction will have to pay a penalty to get his mana on the battlefield, if you see what I mean. (Of course, balance is always the tricky bit. I'm just saying that we need to consider it.)
    Perhaps I'm missing something. If a player focuses on Destruction then they have to pay the distance penalty to cast in combat. If a you focus on summoning and you summon on a remote battlefield you pay the distance penalty as well. If you summon close to your capital then you have to first have the foresight to do so enough in advance to move your units to the remote battlefield AND you have to pay the mana maintenance cost all summoned units should have for the entire travel time
    (or a bunch of mana to use a movement spell to get the unit to the remote battle). Either way if it's balanced properly the maintenance/travel cost should be roughly equivalent to the distance cost so there is no big advantage one way or the other... again, unless I'm missing something.

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