Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Damn, those really seem like a cop-out to me Gandalf. Why in the world would anyone play such games?

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Its not my choice. But as I understand it, they get tired of late-game always being decided by who has the strongest magic. There are some people who really enjoy the early game (explore, expand). And some who really like mid-game of armies meeting armies. I have no problem with people setting up such a game on a larger scale to extend those anymore than I would with no-diplomacy, not having certain nations in the game, or any game changing mod.

As long as its not considered as a permanent change to the entire game then its no problem. Variation in individual games = good. But "fixing" the game in a way that knocks out someone elses variation options = bad. IMHO of course.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Rdnoj:
"Burden of time does most of its damage in the first 2-3 turns it's up anyway. "

Why is that ? I don't understand why do you say here. Why 2-3 turns? I think it's effective every turn it's up.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

I think that is it... where the 'preference' lies in the context of the conflict. I like the thug / SC / Army component of the game (at this point) i guess. Deciding the out come of a conflict by spells that deliver very real results for very little effort isn't clicking with me yet.

I'm going to try my hand at modding a set up such as this and see what happens. I don't think its so much a case of removing the capacity for nations to use powers such as this, it would be to look at the means in which they are able to affect it.

EG, remote assasin spells could be replaced by actual summon spells providing Assasin units...

Rain of toads replaced by an item - muchlike the bane venom charm

Gem gem globals replaced by a unique summons maybe, providing the same gem outputs but providing misfortune or death or reduce dominion as a consequence...

Yep Gandalf, it was important that i snuck arguably in there becasue it is simply that. At this point my premise has become, that, whilst it is important to retain the capacities these spells provide the player interms of drawing games to a conclusion, the means in which they (spells) are able to be brought to bear on an opponent is perhaps too easy and of consequence, significant damage can be done with minimal effort, which in my mind undermines the strategy and tactics of the game.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

The most potent effect of the burden of time is the killing off of national mages. Especially those that start off pretty old. But the best human mages in general tend to start close enough to old age that just a few turns of burden of time are enough to ensure that they'll die. That can be a LOT of mages. After you've killed off, say, 100 mages worldwide, relatively the rest of the turns are a lot less destructive... But sure, burden of time would be happy staying up and killing off the world's population.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Amadamus - You are saying that assassination spells are too easy. But are they? Let us take earth attack as an example. This is a level 8 spell, so you're not going to see it until pretty late in the game unless someone is making a pretty concerted push up conjuration. And then you actually have to find someone who can cast it. With only one real earth booster in the game (unless you're playing vanilla) getting to level 5 earth magic is no easy task for most nations. There is pretty much no good way around at least 1 empower no matter what nation you are playing, and for most you'll probably need to summon troll kings to do it. That's over 100 earth gems, with little chance of cost reduction. So it's a significant investment you're putting into the ability, derailing your ability to build hammers, equip thugs, or cast other earth spells. All this, and you can stop them pretty easily with just a bottle of living water. Manifestation is basically the same, but with more boosters and a 50% chance of you being attacked instead unless there's a horror marked commander you're sending them at. Disease demons are the only ones that are *maybe* too easy, but I think those are a lot easier to stop with bodyguards than the other two.

Unrest spells are a bit different and can be very powerful in the early game, but are easily stopped by domes....

And I'd rethink the gem gen global replacement thing. For one thing it's not any better. In fact it is worse, because no one knows you have the gem generating thing, and can't do anything about it until they figure out where it is. Then they have to march an assassin all the way across the map to *attempt* to kill it? That is ridiculous. And there's nothing you could do about it now with the assassination spells gone. It then becomes a nearly perfectly safe investment, unlike gem generator globals which are clearly visible, show up in the score graphs, and can be taken out via a dispel or an assassinate. They are much more of a gamble as they are now.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Do boots of youth save again BoT? Ive read somewhere that not, but why it could be?

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Perhaps by somewhere you mean the second post in this thread? It does seem buggy that they don't protect against it. Which would make casting rejuvenate the best bet for keeping your mages alive while BoT is up.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Actually, it's pretty easy for EA Agartha but some people keep saying they're a weak nation. Otherwise I agree, the spells are NOT cast without effort. They require research, forging, often empowering or summoning an able mage or designing a specific pretender, and then getting enough gems to actually cast the spells and keeping them up in the case of enchantments.

Re: Spells that arguably break the game
 

Good points - swayed me alot!.