Spells and MRES.

[korexus]

Ok, first a recap. Here's how it works at the minute:

I start with one mage, I can make more from POP 1 per transform.

On a turn, I can cast and make one spell per mage (cast before attacks and transforms, make after) both have a maximum of 3.

My mages each add points to my MRES each turn equal to my Tech Level. This is balanced by them each eating 0.6 * Tech Level food.

Each of my spells cast against an enemy costs a certain amount of gold. More powerful spells tend to cost more. The cost of the spell in gold is subtracted from my opponent's MRES when I cast it. If I knock the MRES down to 0, the spell works.

Currently this works quite well as the MRES is capped at 999 and the most expesive spell comes in at just over 300 gold. Three of these will wipe out my opponent's resistance and next turn (or this turn if I have a clan mate) he'll be hurting.

However if, as I suggested on another thread, we don't cap MRES it will be possible for a player to get the MRES so high that he can never be knocked down again. (Especially as those expensive spells are tricky to make). While I think putting the effort into getting MRES so high should be rewarded, I don't think a player with equivalent or better magical abilities shouldn't be able to get through the barrier.

My suggestion was that the damage done to the MRES is calculated in the same way as the resistance is built up in the first place. #MAG * TECH * modifer for the spell, I would suggest cost / 100 but haven't done any calculations for that.

This way, many powerful mages can push even quite a weak spell through (sometimes you want to cast FEAR). But a handful of mages with low TECH can't get through so easily even with a big spell.

The other suggestion which I saw and like is the idea of a spell which is specifically designed to hurt MRES. High cost, no effect. I think MONSTER BURNER is already used for this purpose and is subject to the issues I raised above, but a spell like this could work just as well in my proposed system. - The spell would have a high modifier and thus strip away more MRES.



Thoughts?


korexus.

[Egbert]

Darn, now I wish I had been playing in that test game, so I can remember all of my suggestions which I had for spells. I do like the idea of a spell that just targets MREs.

However, as I recall, I think the system worked well as it was, with the MREs capped at 999, and the larger spells had to be used to destroy them. So, I do not know why you would be thinking of changing it now, unless you are considering not capping the MREs.

What about keeping the MRE cap, but having a spell that protects MREs. Something which makes you immune from large spells for that turn. The OoP would come into play there. Another possiblity --- I don't remember if this was a spell (if it was, it was a minor one) --- is a spell which adds MREs.

I would think that allowing MREs to go above 1000 would cause a lot of problems, making someone immune to magic. I am not sure that people would welcome a more complicated formula (adding Tech into the equation) as to how to knock them down.

On a related note, I remember one suggestion which Al was going to possibly implement before he disappeared, which I had suggested to him: We eliminate the "duplicate" spells which do the same thing but only to a lesser extent (such as "10 Fingers" and "20 Fingers"), and instead you would have the ability to cast a spell at a different strength. So, if I doubled the dosage, I could create a 40 Fingers spell, etc. This would allow for some interesting variations, and would save space so new and different spells could be added.

I just reviewed the WOK5 Manual, and I see that there is a spell called "Protect," but it is not that strong --- it adds only 200 MREs, which is no match for the more powerful black spells. However, if you could change the dosage of "Protect," you could add 600 MREs in 1 turn.

[korexus]

It's probably worth keeping in mind that the values I got in this game are exceptional. I've never had tech higher than 20 before and players usually stop at around 6 magicians. That makes Protect quite a good spell as it is probably going to add more MRES than your mages will. It's also considerably easier to make than the big damage spells and you usually get lots of turns to build up before being attacked magically.

If you want to remind yourself how the game works, there is a spot left on the test game for you!


korexus.

[Xarfei]

Ok, just to pull a formula out of hat:

MRES destroyed = gold costs * (1 + (#Magicians * Tech level / 200))

i.e. #Mag * Tech level / 2 equals the percentag of extra damage.

e.g. 3 Magicians at tech level 5 add 7.5% damage
e.g. 5 Magicians at tech level 10 add 25% damage
e.g. 6 Magicians at tech level 15 add 45% damage

I general question I have is, how often did players really see their MRES go above 999? I think I have only ever seen it once (and that was another player).
So, how high can you really realistically raise your MRES without following a too extreme strategy?

Xarfei

[korexus]

I've had it cap out maybe 3 times (including the test game which just finished) so you're right it wouldn't be a big thing. It's more that I don't see a justification for the cap within the game mechanics and there's no longer a need in the engine so why not get rid of it? - It may open up new game options. The spell adjustment suggestion seems to fit in neatly with this idea as well as making the weaker spells more useful.

Egbert: The "higher dosage" effect which you describe already exists in spellpower, with two caveats. The quoted value is the maximum a spell can do and white (beneficial) spells always work at 100%

Spell power is calculated as {Tech * 2 (Max 40) + MAG * 6 (Max 36) + EFF - 85 + Weather + 5 (If you cast on certain provinces)} (Max100) The spell power provides a maximum number for the spell, if it is lower than the maximum which the spell can do.

It would be interesting if this were allowed to go over 100 particularly if it were a percentage modifier instead of a maximum. It would also be interesting if this power were applied to white spells. The later might unbalance the game though, as it is hard to get a high spell power early on.


korexus.

[Dameon]

I've maxed out my MRES a few times, but I tend to play a very defensive game in terms of spells, lots of protects and the like. I don't see any reason to prevent such a strategy really, so I'd be in favor of removing the cap. It's not a huge deal in the long run, but it'd be nice to have that option.

Regarding other spells, I've always felt that the WOK 5 spell list is missing some serious direct damage against armies spells. Things like fireball, lightning storm, etc. Yes, there's direct damage spells again workers and pop, but that's not going to help me if I'm facing 246 archers. I do find that upgraded troops tend to be the most powerful thing sometimes, and the only thing that effectively can defeat them is wrecking an opponent's economy (which usually takes a few turns) or GCAs (not super-effective). Some seirous direct damage to troops spells might make magic more important overall as a short-term solution and help balance out some of the strengths of upgraded troops.

[Xarfei]

I like Dameons idea of a spell targeted against upgrades (although I usually use upgrades quite a lot).
How about a "Downgrader" spell - if it goes through - 10 upgrades of each type in the target province (if present) get converted into the next lower upgrade type. (Or maybe 10 * spellpower%)

i.e. a province with 0 Armies / 10 pikeman / 20 catapults hit by the "downgrader" will have 10 armies / 0 pikeman / 10 Knights / 10 catapults afterwards.
Alternative suggestion: have an individual spell for every upgrade type, which is more powerful since it needs more careful aiming.

with regards to armies, there is already a "Dropper" spell which hardly ever gets used. It removes 0.3 levels. Maybe have a stronger (0.6) version of this spell?
Or allow the level temporarily (i.e. until the end of the turn) to drop below 1 (minimum 0.5).

[Egbert]

Egbert: The "higher dosage" effect which you describe already exists in spellpower, with two caveats. The quoted value is the maximum a spell can do and white (beneficial) spells always work at 100%

Spell power is calculated as {Tech * 2 (Max 40) + MAG * 6 (Max 36) + EFF - 85 + Weather + 5 (If you cast on certain provinces)} (Max100) The spell power provides a maximum number for the spell, if it is lower than the maximum which the spell can do.

It would be interesting if this were allowed to go over 100 particularly if it were a percentage modifier instead of a maximum. It would also be interesting if this power were applied to white spells. The later might unbalance the game though, as it is hard to get a high spell power early on.

Well, the "interesting" stuff is what I am suggesting. It would be nice if you could use, say, double the amount of diamonds to cast a double-strength spell. Using Xarfei's example of Dropper, you could drop someone .6 instead of .3, and still have room to cast 2 more spells.

[korexus]

@Egbert. The difference is, you're suggesting a second option when making a spell to multiply up it's effectiveness. I'm suggesting that the spell has the same intrinsic power, but in the same way that few magicians or a low tech level can reduce its effect, many magicians with a high level can increase its effect. The cost is the same, but I'm directly rewarded for getting to tech level 30 by all my spells becoming more powerful. (Currently there is no point to going beyond tech 20.) I should point out that I don't think we should have bonus to spell power and MRES damage be increased by many mages with a high tech level.

The problem with most 'red' spells is that they have relatively small effects, so they are only useful early on, but then they can't be cast effectively. Dropper is the perfect example of this. I can potentially cast it on turn 3, dropping your level by a possible 0.63 (it does 0-1, but I can't max out by turn 3) if you have level 4 armies with loads of upgrades, this is pointless, but early on it could be devastating except that the minimum level is 1 and your level is probably only 1.2 anyway... So many of these spells have good potential, but are just too weak in the later game to be worth it. Either because they'll never get through the MRES or because the effect they have is negligible (or both).

As for Dameon/Xarfei's suggestions, I could see the use of targetted downgrade spells. PIKBLITZ could downgrade pikists, ARCBLITZ to downgrade Archers, etc. I'm not sure I'd use a generalised one as you tend to care most about one type of upgrade. I think killing outright would be too strong, but turning into armies would be a very useful spell.


korexus.

[Nemesis]

I have used Droppers and Fear spells but towards the end game you always have to start the turn with a Cornburner or similar to get through the MRES.

A coordinated attack with a clanmate of 1 cornburner and 5 Fear spells can be great

If you were to create a spell that can actually destroy armies then how about one that kills a percentage of armies, rather than a set amount. Say 20%. So if someone has 50 armies in a province you would kill 10 but if they bring 246 Archers (as Dameon suggested) you would kill 49.

Then if you used 3 spells on the same province you would kill just under half of the original armies, it would never let you completely destroy an army group by magic only.

[korexus]

I have used Droppers and Fear spells but towards the end game you always have to start the turn with a Cornburner or similar to get through the MRES.

That was my original point. If I have lots of mighty magicians then they should be able to force the Fear through straight away. I'd prefer the system to be their skill which brushes the MRES aside rather than a property of the spell. (10 Tech 20 magicians have to be harder to stop than 1 Tech 1 magician, right?)

If you were to create a spell that can actually destroy armies then how about one that kills a percentage of armies, rather than a set amount. Say 20%. So if someone has 50 armies in a province you would kill 10 but if they bring 246 Archers (as Dameon suggested) you would kill 49.

Hmm, I can see reasoning behind the PLAGUE type spells doing a percentage damage. Lots of people packed together would mean more die. Would this be too powerful from a game mechanics point though? While it wouldn't let you kill a group entirely, 5 castings from a clan pair would take the 246 archers down to 79. The equivelent work of 380 GCAs at short range and maximum EFF.


korexus.

[Nemesis]

15% then, 10%?

Make this spell expensive to make? Make it harder to cast?

Obviously whenever creating any new spell we would have to balance it so that it isn't too powerful or too weak.

[Brykovian]

I like the idea of having spells to directly attack armies, beit downgrading and/or outright killing.

In response, how about a localized protection spell that you can cast on one of your own provinces to protect it from being the target of an opponent's spell?

So, you have that grand, upgraded army, but you figure Dameon is about to turn them all back into regular troops or Nemesis might be trying to knock them off all together ... cast your DOME spell on the province to negate or reduce the effects of any inbound spells that target it.

-Bryk

[Xarfei]

In response, how about a localized protection spell that you can cast on one of your own provinces to protect it from being the target of an opponent's spell?

So, you have that grand, upgraded army, but you figure Dameon is about to turn them all back into regular troops or Nemesis might be trying to knock them off all together ... cast your DOME spell on the province to negate or reduce the effects of any inbound spells that target it.
-Bryk

The problem is that such a spell would be heavily Oop dependent.
Unless you alow the spell to protect such a province (additionally) on the next turn (in which case you cast it one turn in advance).
The "Dome" spell could just be against army-targeting spells, or it could protect the province from any kind of magic for a turn (too powerful?).

Xarfei

PS: How difficult is it to implement new spells? Can we come up with completely new spells?

[korexus]

PS: How difficult is it to implement new spells? Can we come up with completely new spells?

You can come up with whatever you like. It just might not happen!

[Dameon]

I do think a plague-type spell would be cool, and I don't think it should cost as much as cornburner et al. Realistically, spells come at the end of the turn, so in order to target them effectively you are going to have to guess where the troops you are aiming at will be at the end of a turn, or be attacking a fortified position where the troops are in a defensive formation anyway. I see it more than anything as a way to tip the balance towards the attackers a bit more and make the game more dynamic, which IMO is always a plus.

I'd be game for either a straight number of troops killed, or a percentage of the troops there per Nemesis' suggestion (or spells for both). I think a protetctive spell to go along with it, as Bryk suggested, would be a good idea as well, as long as it lasted 2-3 turns or so.

[korexus]

Realistically, spells come at the end of the turn, so in order to target them effectively you are going to have to guess where the troops you are aiming at will be at the end of a turn .

Erm, which game have you been playing?!

Spells are made at the end of the turn, but cast at the beginning

I'd be game for either a straight number of troops killed, or a percentage of the troops there per Nemesis' suggestion (or spells for both).

My gut feeling on percentage is that's it's either going to be useless for small groups or massively over powered for large, but I do like the idea so if we can find a balance it could be good.

I think a protetctive spell to go along with it, as Bryk suggested, would be a good idea as well, as long as it lasted 2-3 turns or so.

We're starting to talk along the lines of individual MRES from provinces here, it would be more complicated, but could it work?


korexus.

[Xarfei]

[

I'd be game for either a straight number of troops killed, or a percentage of the troops there per Nemesis' suggestion (or spells for both).

My gut feeling on percentage is that's it's either going to be useless for small groups or massively over powered for large, but I do like the idea so if we can find a balance it could be good.

How about the spells kills a percentage of troops (e.g. 10%), but always kills at least e.g. 5 troops, but never more than e.g. 30.
I.e. it will never be useless and also can never kill too many troops

Xarfei

[Dameon]

Erm, which game have you been playing?!

Spells are made at the end of the turn, but cast at the beginning

Doh! I...uh...knew that. I'm not a noob, I swear. Honest!

We're starting to talk along the lines of individual MRES from provinces here, it would be more complicated, but could it work?

A type of shield spell would be the biggest change to established game order, I agree. As to whether or not it would work, well, you're the programmer. You tell us.

I also agree with Xarfei that we could set upward limits regarding troops killed to a plague spell, but I don't think that we need minimum limits. If you decide to cast a spell on a small concentration of troops, well, that's your loss right? We could also avoid problems alltogether by setting a specific number of troops killed....always 5, 10, 20, whatever, so players could pick the right tool for the right job, as it were.

[Brykovian]

We're starting to talk along the lines of individual MRES from provinces here, it would be more complicated, but could it work?

I don't think so. I'd rather look at it as an effect ... similar to a normal white spell, except that instead of immediately taking care of its effect (increasing CROP or TREE, etc.) you would need to track it for the duration of its time (the current turn, imo ... but others might argue that it give a multi-turn benefit).

Basically, if you successfully cast it, it causes any magical effects against that province to be reduced (the reduction amount would likely be tied to the "strength" of the spell) during the duration. It's on/off, imo ... not a province-specific MREs level that needs to be defeated.

As for OoP dependence ... the same thing happens on attacks already. Or on GCAs ... so, having the spell-casting order be impacted by OoP only feels natural within WoK. Your opponent is going to cast before you do ... well, then that DOME spell isn't going to do much good ... best use a different spell.

-Bryk