Re: Gems after the Battles
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">What magic levels do you need for doom? Can't see my shamen doing it easilly http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Still its easy enough to get a pile of shamen and a few TSs and do it the inelegant way http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Gems after the Battles
 

licker --
Hmmm. I don't have the demo with me at the moment, but if it hasn't changed from Dom I, Doom requires Astral 4 on the mage and Alteration 8 must have been researched. Oh, and it consumes 1 astral gem.
It'd be rather annoying if shamans were capable of tossing it off in the early game...

Gems after the Battles
 

I'm not sure if this is a bug... was looking for opinions first. I've noticed that when killing commanders, priests or spellcasters you get any items they were using. {that's fine}
However I also noticed that for some reason you don't get their gems. I could understand 20% of the gems getting lost or destroyed after some fireball killed the enemy... unfortunately all the gems disappear.
It would be nice to get any unused gems after a victorious battle. Little amulets are found after battle... why not the gems ?

Pondering,

Re: Gems after the Battles
 

Usually magic items aren't found either, unless they are cursed or powerful ones that want to be found.

Re: Gems after the Battles
 

You've got it: Doom requires Astral 4, costs 1 gem and 100- fatigue, and affects all enemies on the battlefield (and is not listed as resistible in the information I have on it). It is an Alteration 7 spell, however, not 8.

Re: Gems after the Battles
 

Somehow the original topic has been lost.... so I'm kickin it back to the front. I've noticed after killing spellcasters with gems that the gems are lost when the battle ends. WHY ?


~On the same note:
Shouldn't the game have more spoils of war?? I mean if you conquer a castle of a strong kingdom... why wouldn't the player get some gold and gems from its treasury?? (even a percentage would be expected)

[ November 14, 2003, 01:26: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Re: Gems after the Battles
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Without more Diplomacy the game would quickly turn into "he who attacks most wins".

Sammual

Re: Gems after the Battles
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">There may be others, but I'm not one of them... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I have the feeling that this is one of those areas where either the effect is going to be so small to make it not worth the bother to add it in, or so large that it creates an even greater imbalance. I mean if you are tromping on an enemy do you really need the extra goodies? From a realism view you may say yes, but from a game balance view the answer is probably no. I mean the most important commodity in the game is provinces, as you beat an opponent you get more and he gets less, so to skew the numbers even more drasticly... I don't think its needed.

Re: Gems after the Battles
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Whether its single player or multi-player I would have to disagree. Because if a major attack fails it could easily cause one of your nearby neighbors to see you as freshly wounded meat. And especially in multiplayer where gamers usually join forces against the greatest danger. Plus in singleplayer games it would allow AI opponents to be rewarded and become stronger for being aggressive.

I strongly believe the game should have more spoils of war. Right now the treasury and gems of a dying race just vanishes. Certainly there are others that agree.