![]() |
Re: On gems
See the Conceptual Balance mods, and compare prices with/without it. It gives the balancers' view on how worthy the spells are in MP. Wrathful Skies is very good, for one, but the Army Of X spells are considerably cheaper IIRC. And the Will'O'Wisp becomes Conjuration 1, but retains the 1-gem cost, so it's probably not worth it at such high levels.
|
Re: On gems
Quote:
Quote:
Spells I script regularly that cost gems : depends somewhat on gem income (and whether it's a big battle), but for example : Swarm (1 nature) and Shadow Blast (1 death). |
Re: On gems
Someone should really just mod the damn thing and make battle spells not cost gems but raised level of magic mastery required to cast it. That way you can use gems to empower them and it won't be such a pain on the micromanagement. Don't get me wrong, micromanagement is fun when it's not TEDIOUS.
|
Re: On gems
but just raising the lever dosnt really work out too well with balance imo
|
Re: On gems
Taking gem-cost out of the equation would make pretenders and communion-users much cheaper than other nations. This would give few nations and strategies much more powerful magically, and because powerful spells control the late game, it would remove variability.
Just as shovah said, there are balance problems with that. It has been suggested that items and gems could be moved to/from the laboratory even without a laboratory being present in the province. I'm not sure if that would be any better, balance-wise... |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:30 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.